From: Mason <slash.tmp@free.fr>
To: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Cc: Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] Revert "net: phy: Correctly process PHY_HALTED in phy_stop_machine()"
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 21:14:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <89164218-82a8-ae12-4b1a-c2d0d8a04624@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ff070239-28b7-d41b-8abe-c9f810561372@caviumnetworks.com>
On 06/09/2017 20:00, David Daney wrote:
> On 08/31/2017 11:29 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 08/31/2017 11:12 AM, Mason wrote:
>>> On 31/08/2017 19:53, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>> On 08/31/2017 10:49 AM, Mason wrote:
>>>>> On 31/08/2017 18:57, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>>>> And the race is between phy_detach() setting phydev->attached_dev = NULL
>>>>>> and phy_state_machine() running in PHY_HALTED state and calling
>>>>>> netif_carrier_off().
>>>>>
>>>>> I must be missing something.
>>>>> (Since a thread cannot race against itself.)
>>>>>
>>>>> phy_disconnect calls phy_stop_machine which
>>>>> 1) stops the work queue from running in a separate thread
>>>>> 2) calls phy_state_machine *synchronously*
>>>>> which runs the PHY_HALTED case with everything well-defined
>>>>> end of phy_stop_machine
>>>>>
>>>>> phy_disconnect only then calls phy_detach()
>>>>> which makes future calls of phy_state_machine perilous.
>>>>>
>>>>> This all happens in the same thread, so I'm not yet
>>>>> seeing where the race happens?
>>>>
>>>> The race is as described in David's earlier email, so let's recap:
>>>>
>>>> Thread 1 Thread 2
>>>> phy_disconnect()
>>>> phy_stop_interrupts()
>>>> phy_stop_machine()
>>>> phy_state_machine()
>>>> -> queue_delayed_work()
>>>> phy_detach()
>>>> phy_state_machine()
>>>> -> netif_carrier_off()
>>>>
>>>> If phy_detach() finishes earlier than the workqueue had a chance to be
>>>> scheduled and process PHY_HALTED again, then we trigger the NULL pointer
>>>> de-reference.
>>>>
>>>> workqueues are not tasklets, the CPU scheduling them gets no guarantee
>>>> they will run on the same CPU.
>>>
>>> Something does not add up.
>>>
>>> The synchronous call to phy_state_machine() does:
>>>
>>> case PHY_HALTED:
>>> if (phydev->link) {
>>> phydev->link = 0;
>>> netif_carrier_off(phydev->attached_dev);
>>> phy_adjust_link(phydev);
>>> do_suspend = true;
>>> }
>>>
>>> then sets phydev->link = 0; therefore subsequent calls to
>>> phy_state_machin() will be no-op.
>>
>> Actually you are right, once phydev->link is set to 0 these would become
>> no-ops. Still scratching my head as to what happens for David then...
>>
>>>
>>> Also, queue_delayed_work() is only called in polling mode.
>>> David stated that he's using interrupt mode.
>
> Did you see what I wrote?
>
> phy_disconnect() calls phy_stop_interrupts() which puts it into polling
> mode. So the polling work gets queued unconditionally.
I did address that remark in
https://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg186336.html
int phy_stop_interrupts(struct phy_device *phydev)
{
int err = phy_disable_interrupts(phydev);
if (err)
phy_error(phydev);
free_irq(phydev->irq, phydev);
/* If work indeed has been cancelled, disable_irq() will have
* been left unbalanced from phy_interrupt() and enable_irq()
* has to be called so that other devices on the line work.
*/
while (atomic_dec_return(&phydev->irq_disable) >= 0)
enable_irq(phydev->irq);
return err;
}
Which part of this function changes phydev->irq to PHY_POLL?
Perhaps phydev->drv->config_intr?
What PHY are you using?
Regards.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-06 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-31 0:49 [PATCH net] Revert "net: phy: Correctly process PHY_HALTED in phy_stop_machine()" Florian Fainelli
2017-08-31 1:47 ` David Miller
2017-08-31 12:29 ` Marc Gonzalez
2017-08-31 14:21 ` Marc Gonzalez
2017-08-31 16:36 ` David Daney
2017-08-31 16:57 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-08-31 17:49 ` Mason
2017-08-31 17:53 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-08-31 18:12 ` Mason
2017-08-31 18:29 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-09-06 14:33 ` Mason
2017-09-06 17:53 ` David Daney
2017-09-06 18:00 ` David Daney
2017-09-06 18:59 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-09-06 20:49 ` David Daney
2017-09-06 22:51 ` David Daney
2017-09-06 23:14 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-09-07 0:10 ` David Daney
2017-09-07 1:41 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-09-06 19:14 ` Mason [this message]
2017-08-31 17:35 ` Mason
2017-08-31 17:03 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-08-31 19:09 ` Mason
2017-08-31 19:18 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-09-06 14:55 ` Mason
2017-09-06 19:28 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-09-06 15:51 ` Mason
2017-09-06 19:42 ` Florian Fainelli
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=89164218-82a8-ae12-4b1a-c2d0d8a04624@free.fr \
--to=slash.tmp@free.fr \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
--cc=mans@mansr.com \
--cc=marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).