Re: [PATCH] mmc: dw_mmc: Don't enable interrupts until we're ready

From: Jaehoon Chung
Date: Thu Sep 04 2014 - 17:53:41 EST


Doug,

On 09/05/2014 04:21 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Jaehoon,
>
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Doug
>>
>> On 09/03/2014 08:37 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>> On dw_mmc there's a small race if you happen to get a card detect
>>> interrupt at just the wrong time during probe. You may have enabled
>>> the interrupt but host->slot[0] may be NULL.
>>>
>>> Fix the race by enabling interrupts all the way at the end of the
>>> probe. We can also use free_irq() instead of dw_mmc specific masking
>>> to mask the IRQ at removal time. Note that since we're now managing
>>> freeing of the irq ourselves, there's no need to use devm.
>>>
>>> FYI, the crash would look like:
>>> dwmmc_rockchip ff0c0000.dwmmc: DW MMC controller at irq 64, 32 bit host data width, 256 deep fifo
>>> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000
>>> pgd = c0004000
>>> [00000000] *pgd=00000000
>>> ...
>>> ...
>>> [<c0499380>] (dw_mci_work_routine_card) from [<c0134b94>] (process_one_work+0x260/0x3c4)
>>> [<c0134b94>] (process_one_work) from [<c0135b10>] (worker_thread+0x240/0x3a8)
>>> [<c0135b10>] (worker_thread) from [<c013b64c>] (kthread+0x100/0x118)
>>> [<c013b64c>] (kthread) from [<c0106418>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x20)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> FYI: making dw_mmc into a module and trying module removal was not
>>> tested. I'd appreciate any testing that folks can do there. This
>>> code should be the equivalent and makes the error case of probe match
>>> the removal case more closely now.
>>>
>>> drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 17 +++++++++++------
>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> index 7f227e9..540ba3c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> @@ -2577,10 +2577,6 @@ int dw_mci_probe(struct dw_mci *host)
>>> goto err_dmaunmap;
>>> }
>>> INIT_WORK(&host->card_work, dw_mci_work_routine_card);
>>> - ret = devm_request_irq(host->dev, host->irq, dw_mci_interrupt,
>>> - host->irq_flags, "dw-mci", host);
>>> - if (ret)
>>> - goto err_workqueue;
>>>
>>> if (host->pdata->num_slots)
>>> host->num_slots = host->pdata->num_slots;
>>> @@ -2619,11 +2615,21 @@ int dw_mci_probe(struct dw_mci *host)
>>> goto err_workqueue;
>>> }
>>>
>>> + ret = request_irq(host->irq, dw_mci_interrupt, host->irq_flags,
>>> + "dw-mci", host);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + goto err_initted;
>>
>> I didn't test and consider race condition yet.
>> But if located "request_irq" at here, we can be confused something,
>> since there is "dev_info(host->dev, "%d slots initialized\n", init_slots)" message at above.
>>
>> I think you can relocate this.
>
> OK, good point. Maybe we should skip this patch after all. There is
> definitely a race there, but I'm not 100% sure this is the right fix
> for it.

I'm not sure this patch is fixed for it, too.
So i will check more with your patch.
But i think if we can maintain current status, it will be the best.

Best Regards,
Jaehoon Chung

>
> In general we probably need to look at the dw_mci_work_routine_card()
> a bit more (used for card detect) since that's only used for official
> "CD" lines. ...and as we've talked about anyone who wants to properly
> power their card off should be using GPIOs, thus they won't get the
> benefit of whatever dw_mci_work_routine_card() does.
>
> I did play around a little bit with trying to test the module remove.
> Both before and after my patch it hung.
>
> -Doug
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/