From: "andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Hamish Martin <Hamish.Martin@alliedtelesis.co.nz>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com"
<mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
"rafael@kernel.org" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"brgl@bgdev.pl" <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
"linus.walleij@linaro.org" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: acpi: Move storage of acpi_gpio_chip
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 12:52:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zfgc7soiZyRAhUkp@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a0c6898f94d5ca3132a132fc47e8d8e23c36eb4e.camel@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
Summon Hans and Sakari for the ideas and for heads up (MIPI case can be
affected as well).
On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 12:39:03AM +0000, Hamish Martin wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-03-14 at 15:18 +0200, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 01:13:31AM +0000, Hamish Martin wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2024-03-13 at 13:26 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
...
> > > Removing the setting of the handle to invalid may be the right fix
> > > but
> > > I don't feel I know the code well enough to make a decision on
> > > that. It
> > > certainly doesn't resolve things immediately - I saw ref counting
> > > warnings output.
> >
> > Not removing, but moving to the better place?
> > Can you share warnings, though?
> >
> For context here is the current call chain that leads to
> acpi_gpiochip_remove():
>
> acpi_gpiochip_remove+0x32/0x1a0
> gpiochip_remove+0x39/0x140
> devres_release_group+0xe6/0x160
> i2c_device_remove+0x2d/0x80
> device_release_driver_internal+0x19a/0x200
> bus_remove_device+0xbf/0x100
> device_del+0x157/0x490
> ? __pfx_device_match_fwnode+0x10/0x10
> ? srso_return_thunk+0x5/0x5f
> device_unregister+0xd/0x30
> i2c_acpi_notify+0x10e/0x160
> notifier_call_chain+0x58/0xd0
> blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x3a/0x60
> acpi_device_del_work_fn+0x85/0x1d0
> process_one_work+0x134/0x2f0
> worker_thread+0x2f0/0x410
> ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10
> kthread+0xe3/0x110
> ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
> ret_from_fork+0x2f/0x50
> ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
> ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30
Right, and with invalid handle it can't process further.
And note, that _pointer_ is valid, the content become
unavailable.
> I removed the setting of adev->handle = INVALID_ACPI_HANDLE from
> acpi_scan_drop_device() and shifted it to just after the call to
> blocking_notifier_call_chain() in acpi_device_del_work_fn().
> With that it seems things progress further with the call to
> acpi_get_data() in acpi_gpiochip_remove() succeeding now. However,
> later in acpi_gpiochip_free_regions() we hit this error:
>
> pca953x i2c-PRP0001:03: Failed to remove GPIO OpRegion handler
>
> We also get these errors:
> ACPI Warning: Obj 00000000ba6a9600, Reference Count is already zero,
> cannot decrement
> (20230628/utdelete-422)
Right, because of ACPICA (not even ACPI glue layer!) the callbacks are called
when namespace node (which is acpi_handle) is being removed.
I spend a few hours to understand the history of the invalidation of the handle.
TBH, it looks like a hack to me, but its presence seems necessary to avoid racing
with the hotplug work. It's a lot of functions that run asynchronously there
and the validness of some objects is questionable.
Here are the commits in question:
d783156ea384 ("ACPI / scan: Define non-empty device removal handler")
c27b2c33b621 ("ACPI / hotplug: Introduce common hotplug function acpi_device_hotplug()")
(It doesn't mean they are bad, it means that this requires more investigation.)
That said, from my perspective what should be done/clarified
- the scope of ACPI data (Can we use it outside of ACPICA/ACPI glue layer or not?)
- clarify in the documentation the scope / life time of the ACPI objects from
the ACPICA perspective (Is it already done? Where?)
- remove that invalidation hack and find better solution for the race avoidance
> > P.S.
> > I'm not an expert in ACPICA and low lever of ACPI glue layer in the Linux
> > kernel, perhaps Rafael can suggest something better.
> >
> OK, thanks for your help. Hopefully Rafael can add something to the
> discssion.
Added more people to harvest the ideas.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-18 10:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-13 3:02 [PATCH] gpiolib: acpi: Move storage of acpi_gpio_chip Hamish Martin
2024-03-13 11:21 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-03-13 11:26 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-03-14 1:13 ` Hamish Martin
2024-03-14 13:18 ` andriy.shevchenko
2024-03-15 0:39 ` Hamish Martin
2024-03-18 10:52 ` andriy.shevchenko [this message]
2024-04-18 19:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=Zfgc7soiZyRAhUkp@smile.fi.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Hamish.Martin@alliedtelesis.co.nz \
--cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
/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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).