From: andre.przywara@arm.com (Andre Przywara)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] serial/amba-pl011: Disable interrupts around TX softirq
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 12:09:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <557EB287.300@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150613003945.GA10941@kroah.com>
Hi Greg,
On 06/13/2015 01:39 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 03:07:47PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
>> pl011_tx_softirq() currently uses spin_{,un}lock(), which are not
>> sufficient to inhibit pl011_int() from being triggered by a local
>> IRQ and trying to re-take the same lock. This can lead to
>> deadlocks.
>>
>> This patch uses the _irq() locking variants instead to ensure that
>> pl011_int() handling for a given port is deferred until any
>> pl011_tx_softirq() work for that port is complete.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
>> Tested-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>> Cc: stable <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 4.1
>> ---
>>
>> Another candidate for v4.1 if possible (sorry!) -- I thought this change
>> was already in, but it went astray when I was refactoring.
>
> Too late for 4.1, sorry.
So if I get this correctly, we go from "some characters lost from
systemd messages" behaviour in 4.0 to "may deadlock" in 4.1 now?
Is that right?
I understand that you are reluctant to take this patch this late in the
game, but wouldn't it actually be better now to revert PL011 to the
state of 4.0 to avoid ending up with worse-than-4.0 behaviour in the 4.1
release?
We could still backport the solution ending up in 4.2-rc to 4.1.x.
Cheers,
Andre.
> This doesn't apply to my tty-next branch,
> otherwise I would have queued it up there. Care to redo it and mark it
> for -stable, like I did above, and resend it?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Dave P Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: "Russell King" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
"Jakub Kiciński" <moorray3@wp.pl>,
"Andrew Jackson" <Andrew.Jackson@arm.com>,
"Graeme Gregory" <gg@slimlogic.co.uk>,
"linux-serial@vger.kernel.org" <linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>,
"popcorn mix" <popcornmix@gmail.com>,
"Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz" <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org>,
"Robin Murphy" <Robin.Murphy@arm.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial/amba-pl011: Disable interrupts around TX softirq
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 12:09:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <557EB287.300@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150613003945.GA10941@kroah.com>
Hi Greg,
On 06/13/2015 01:39 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 03:07:47PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
>> pl011_tx_softirq() currently uses spin_{,un}lock(), which are not
>> sufficient to inhibit pl011_int() from being triggered by a local
>> IRQ and trying to re-take the same lock. This can lead to
>> deadlocks.
>>
>> This patch uses the _irq() locking variants instead to ensure that
>> pl011_int() handling for a given port is deferred until any
>> pl011_tx_softirq() work for that port is complete.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
>> Tested-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>> Cc: stable <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 4.1
>> ---
>>
>> Another candidate for v4.1 if possible (sorry!) -- I thought this change
>> was already in, but it went astray when I was refactoring.
>
> Too late for 4.1, sorry.
So if I get this correctly, we go from "some characters lost from
systemd messages" behaviour in 4.0 to "may deadlock" in 4.1 now?
Is that right?
I understand that you are reluctant to take this patch this late in the
game, but wouldn't it actually be better now to revert PL011 to the
state of 4.0 to avoid ending up with worse-than-4.0 behaviour in the 4.1
release?
We could still backport the solution ending up in 4.2-rc to 4.1.x.
Cheers,
Andre.
> This doesn't apply to my tty-next branch,
> otherwise I would have queued it up there. Care to redo it and mark it
> for -stable, like I did above, and resend it?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-15 11:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-05 14:07 [PATCH] serial/amba-pl011: Disable interrupts around TX softirq Dave Martin
2015-06-05 14:07 ` Dave Martin
2015-06-05 18:03 ` Robin Murphy
2015-06-05 18:03 ` Robin Murphy
2015-06-08 10:34 ` Robin Murphy
2015-06-08 10:34 ` Robin Murphy
2015-06-08 11:34 ` Dave P Martin
2015-06-08 11:34 ` Dave P Martin
2015-06-13 0:39 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-06-13 0:39 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-06-15 10:53 ` Dave P Martin
2015-06-15 10:53 ` Dave P Martin
2015-06-15 11:09 ` Andre Przywara [this message]
2015-06-15 11:09 ` Andre Przywara
2015-06-15 14:03 ` Dave Martin
2015-06-15 14:03 ` Dave Martin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-06-18 13:54 Dave Martin
2015-06-18 13:54 ` Dave Martin
2015-06-20 9:09 ` Stefan Wahren
2015-06-20 9:09 ` Stefan Wahren
2015-06-20 9:09 ` Stefan Wahren
2015-06-23 11:13 ` Dave P Martin
2015-06-23 11:13 ` Dave P Martin
2015-07-09 10:57 Dave Martin
2015-07-09 10:57 ` Dave Martin
2015-07-23 22:05 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-07-23 22:05 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-07-24 9:56 ` Dave Martin
2015-07-24 9:56 ` Dave Martin
2015-07-24 15:15 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-07-24 15:15 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-07-24 16:46 ` Dave Martin
2015-07-24 16:46 ` Dave Martin
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=557EB287.300@arm.com \
--to=andre.przywara@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.