Re: WARNING: suspicious RCU usage - sdhci-pltfm: SDHCI platform and OF driver helper
From: Lina Iyer
Date: Tue Sep 01 2020 - 11:48:27 EST
Hi Ulf,
On Tue, Sep 01 2020 at 06:41 -0600, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 at 14:35, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 at 12:42, <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 08:50:57AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 Sep 2020 at 08:46, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 at 21:44, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > > [ 5.308588] =============================
> > > > > [ 5.308593] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> > > > > [ 5.316628] sdhci-pltfm: SDHCI platform and OF driver helper
> > > > > [ 5.320052] 5.9.0-rc3 #1 Not tainted
> > > > > [ 5.320057] -----------------------------
> > > > > [ 5.320063] /usr/src/kernel/include/trace/events/lock.h:37 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
> > > > > [ 5.320068]
> > > > > [ 5.320068] other info that might help us debug this:
> > > > > [ 5.320068]
> > > > > [ 5.320074]
> > > > > [ 5.320074] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
> > > > > [ 5.320078] RCU used illegally from extended quiescent state!
> > > > > [ 5.320084] no locks held by swapper/0/0.
> > > > > [ 5.320089]
> > > > > [ 5.320089] stack backtrace:
> > > > > [ 5.320098] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.9.0-rc3 #1
> > > > > [ 5.346354] sdhci_msm 7864900.sdhci: Got CD GPIO
> > > > > [ 5.346446] Hardware name: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. APQ 8016 SBC (DT)
> > > > > [ 5.346452] Call trace:
> > > > > [ 5.346463] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x1f8
> > > > > [ 5.346471] show_stack+0x2c/0x38
> > > > > [ 5.346480] dump_stack+0xec/0x15c
> > > > > [ 5.346490] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xd4/0xf8
> > > > > [ 5.346499] lock_acquire+0x3d0/0x440
> > > > > [ 5.346510] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x80/0xb0
> > > > > [ 5.413118] __pm_runtime_suspend+0x34/0x1d0
> > > > > [ 5.417457] psci_enter_domain_idle_state+0x4c/0xb0
> > > > > [ 5.421795] cpuidle_enter_state+0xc8/0x610
> > > > > [ 5.426392] cpuidle_enter+0x3c/0x50
> > > > > [ 5.430561] call_cpuidle+0x44/0x80
> > > > > [ 5.434378] do_idle+0x240/0x2a0
>
> > > > Note also that Peter Zijlstra (CCed) is working to shrink the portion
> > > > of the idle loop that RCU ignores. Not sure that it covers your
> > > > case, but it is worth checking.
>
> Right, so I think I 'caused' this by making the lock tracepoints
> visible. That is, the error always existed, now we actually warn about
> it.
>
> > > Thanks for letting me know. Let's see what Peter thinks about this then.
> > >
> > > Apologize for my ignorance, but from a cpuidle point of view, what
> > > does it mean using RCU_NONIDLE()? I guess we should avoid RCU_NONIDLE
> > > on bigger code paths?
> > >
> > > I could add RCU_NONIDLE for the calls to pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend()
> > > and pm_runtime_get_sync() in psci_enter_domain_idle_state(). Perhaps
> > > that's the easiest approach, at least to start with.
> > >
I think this would be nice. This should also cover the case, where PM domain
power off notification callbacks call trace function internally. Right?
--Lina
> > > Or do you have any other ideas?
>
> So IMO trace_*_rcuidle() and RCU_NONIDLE() are bugs, they just mean we
> got the ordering wrong and are papering over it. That said, that's been
> the modus operandi for a while now, just make it shut up and don't think
> about it :-/
>
> That said; I pushed the rcu_idle_enter() about as deep as it goes into
> generic code in commit 1098582a0f6c ("sched,idle,rcu: Push rcu_idle
> deeper into the idle path")
Aha, that commit should fix this problem, I think. Looks like that
commit was sent as a fix and included in the recent v5.9-rc3.
Naresh, can you try with the above commit?
Ah, just realized that I misread the patch. It doesn't fix it.
We would still need a RCU_NONIDLE() in psci_enter_domain_idle_state()
- or something along the lines of what you suggest below.
Apologies for the noise.
Kind regards
Uffe
[1]. https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/8/26/81
>
> I suppose the next step is pushing it into individual driver when
> needed, something like the below perhaps. I realize the coupled idle
> state stuff is more complicated that most, but it's also not an area
> I've looked at in detail, so perhaps I've just made a bigger mess, but
> it ought to give you enough to get going I think.
These aren't coupled states. Instead, in cpuidle-psci, we are using PM
domains through genpd and runtime PM to manage "shared idle states"
between CPUs.
Kind regards
Uffe
>
> Rafael?
>
> ---
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c
> index 74463841805f..617bbef316e6 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.c
> @@ -49,6 +49,9 @@ static inline u32 psci_get_domain_state(void)
>
> static inline int psci_enter_state(int idx, u32 state)
> {
> + /*
> + * XXX push rcu_idle_enter into the coupled code
> + */
> return CPU_PM_CPU_IDLE_ENTER_PARAM(psci_cpu_suspend_enter, idx, state);
> }
>
> @@ -72,7 +75,9 @@ static int psci_enter_domain_idle_state(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
> if (!state)
> state = states[idx];
>
> + rcu_idle_enter();
> ret = psci_cpu_suspend_enter(state) ? -1 : idx;
> + rcu_idle_exit();
>
> pm_runtime_get_sync(pd_dev);
>
> @@ -125,8 +130,13 @@ static int psci_enter_idle_state(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
> struct cpuidle_driver *drv, int idx)
> {
> u32 *state = __this_cpu_read(psci_cpuidle_data.psci_states);
> + int ret;
>
> - return psci_enter_state(idx, state[idx]);
> + rcu_idle_enter();
> + ret = psci_enter_state(idx, state[idx]);
> + rcu_idle_exit();
> +
> + return ret;
> }
>
> static const struct of_device_id psci_idle_state_match[] = {
> @@ -170,6 +180,7 @@ static int psci_dt_cpu_init_topology(struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> * deeper states.
> */
> drv->states[state_count - 1].enter = psci_enter_domain_idle_state;
> + drv->states[state_count - 1].flags = CPUIDLE_FLAG_RCU_IDLE;
> psci_cpuidle_use_cpuhp = true;
>
> return 0;
> @@ -285,6 +296,7 @@ static int psci_idle_init_cpu(struct device *dev, int cpu)
> * state index 0.
> */
> drv->states[0].enter = psci_enter_idle_state;
> + drv->states[0].flags = CPUIDLE_FLAG_RCU_IDLE;
> drv->states[0].exit_latency = 1;
> drv->states[0].target_residency = 1;
> drv->states[0].power_usage = UINT_MAX;
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> index 04becd70cc41..3dbac3bb761b 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c
> @@ -239,9 +239,11 @@ int cpuidle_enter_state(struct cpuidle_device *dev, struct cpuidle_driver *drv,
> time_start = ns_to_ktime(local_clock());
>
> stop_critical_timings();
> - rcu_idle_enter();
> + if (!(target_state->flags & CPUIDLE_FLAG_RCU_IDLE))
> + rcu_idle_enter();
> entered_state = target_state->enter(dev, drv, index);
> - rcu_idle_exit();
> + if (!(target_state->flags & CPUIDLE_FLAG_RCU_IDLE))
> + rcu_idle_exit();
> start_critical_timings();
>
> sched_clock_idle_wakeup_event();
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuidle.h b/include/linux/cpuidle.h
> index 75895e6363b8..47f686131a54 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cpuidle.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpuidle.h
> @@ -82,6 +82,7 @@ struct cpuidle_state {
> #define CPUIDLE_FLAG_UNUSABLE BIT(3) /* avoid using this state */
> #define CPUIDLE_FLAG_OFF BIT(4) /* disable this state by default */
> #define CPUIDLE_FLAG_TLB_FLUSHED BIT(5) /* idle-state flushes TLBs */
> +#define CPUIDLE_FLAG_RCU_IDLE BIT(6) /* driver will do RCU-idle */
>
> struct cpuidle_device_kobj;
> struct cpuidle_state_kobj;