From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@gmail.com>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
Ley Foon Tan <ley.foon.tan@intel.com>,
rfi@lists.rocketboards.org, Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: rockchip: Avoid accessing PCIe registers with clocks gated
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 13:49:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210630184954.GA4169648@bjorn-Precision-5520> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3d5a983f-bfdd-d79b-4ec9-357ea26dd2c8@arm.com>
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 11:52:44AM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Well, it does use devm_request_irq() so the handler should be unregistered
> by devres *after* ->remove has finished, however that does still leave a
> potential race window in which a pending IRQ could be taken during the later
> part of rockchip_pcie_remove() after it has started turning off critical
> things. Unless the clocks and regulators can also be delegated to devres, it
> might be more robust to explicitly manage the IRQs as well. Mixing the two
> schemes can be problematic when the exact order of both setup and teardown
> matters.
Thanks for this. I missed this problem. We have lots of PCI
controller drivers that use some devm interfaces but use the non-devm
clk_prepare_enable(), and they generally turn things off in their
.remove() methods, which is obviously before any devm unregistration.
Many .suspend() methods turn off clocks and power while leaving the
IRQ handler installed. Should we get an interrupt from our device
after .suspend()? *Probably* not, but it makes me a little queasy to
rely on that, or to rely on the assumption that the IRQ is not shared.
Bjorn
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@gmail.com>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
Ley Foon Tan <ley.foon.tan@intel.com>,
rfi@lists.rocketboards.org, Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: rockchip: Avoid accessing PCIe registers with clocks gated
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 13:49:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210630184954.GA4169648@bjorn-Precision-5520> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3d5a983f-bfdd-d79b-4ec9-357ea26dd2c8@arm.com>
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 11:52:44AM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Well, it does use devm_request_irq() so the handler should be unregistered
> by devres *after* ->remove has finished, however that does still leave a
> potential race window in which a pending IRQ could be taken during the later
> part of rockchip_pcie_remove() after it has started turning off critical
> things. Unless the clocks and regulators can also be delegated to devres, it
> might be more robust to explicitly manage the IRQs as well. Mixing the two
> schemes can be problematic when the exact order of both setup and teardown
> matters.
Thanks for this. I missed this problem. We have lots of PCI
controller drivers that use some devm interfaces but use the non-devm
clk_prepare_enable(), and they generally turn things off in their
.remove() methods, which is obviously before any devm unregistration.
Many .suspend() methods turn off clocks and power while leaving the
IRQ handler installed. Should we get an interrupt from our device
after .suspend()? *Probably* not, but it makes me a little queasy to
rely on that, or to rely on the assumption that the IRQ is not shared.
Bjorn
_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@gmail.com>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
Ley Foon Tan <ley.foon.tan@intel.com>,
rfi@lists.rocketboards.org, Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: rockchip: Avoid accessing PCIe registers with clocks gated
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 13:49:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210630184954.GA4169648@bjorn-Precision-5520> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3d5a983f-bfdd-d79b-4ec9-357ea26dd2c8@arm.com>
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 11:52:44AM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Well, it does use devm_request_irq() so the handler should be unregistered
> by devres *after* ->remove has finished, however that does still leave a
> potential race window in which a pending IRQ could be taken during the later
> part of rockchip_pcie_remove() after it has started turning off critical
> things. Unless the clocks and regulators can also be delegated to devres, it
> might be more robust to explicitly manage the IRQs as well. Mixing the two
> schemes can be problematic when the exact order of both setup and teardown
> matters.
Thanks for this. I missed this problem. We have lots of PCI
controller drivers that use some devm interfaces but use the non-devm
clk_prepare_enable(), and they generally turn things off in their
.remove() methods, which is obviously before any devm unregistration.
Many .suspend() methods turn off clocks and power while leaving the
IRQ handler installed. Should we get an interrupt from our device
after .suspend()? *Probably* not, but it makes me a little queasy to
rely on that, or to rely on the assumption that the IRQ is not shared.
Bjorn
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-30 18:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-08 8:04 [PATCH v2] PCI: rockchip: Avoid accessing PCIe registers with clocks gated Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-08 8:04 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-08 8:04 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-12 22:02 ` Peter Robinson
2021-06-12 22:02 ` Peter Robinson
2021-06-12 22:02 ` Peter Robinson
2021-06-22 10:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-06-22 10:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-06-22 10:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-06-24 21:57 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-24 21:57 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-24 21:57 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-24 23:18 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-24 23:18 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-24 23:18 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-24 23:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-24 23:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-24 23:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-24 23:51 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-24 23:51 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-24 23:51 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-24 22:40 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-24 22:40 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-24 22:40 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-25 7:09 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-25 7:09 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-25 7:09 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-25 14:32 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-25 14:32 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-25 14:32 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-25 18:34 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-25 18:34 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-25 18:34 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-29 0:38 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-29 0:38 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-29 0:38 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-29 6:17 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-29 6:17 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-29 6:17 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-29 10:52 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-29 10:52 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-29 10:52 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-29 23:14 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-29 23:14 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-29 23:14 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-30 9:44 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-30 9:44 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-30 9:44 ` Robin Murphy
2021-06-30 18:49 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2021-06-30 18:49 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-30 18:49 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-30 18:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-30 18:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-30 18:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-30 19:59 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-30 19:59 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-30 19:59 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-30 20:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-30 20:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-30 20:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-30 20:46 ` Peter Robinson
2021-06-30 20:46 ` Peter Robinson
2021-06-30 20:46 ` Peter Robinson
2021-06-30 22:09 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-30 22:09 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-06-30 22:09 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-07-01 13:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-07-01 13:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-07-01 13:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-07-01 14:59 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-07-01 14:59 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2021-07-01 14:59 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
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=20210630184954.GA4169648@bjorn-Precision-5520 \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=javierm@redhat.com \
--cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
--cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=ley.foon.tan@intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=michal.simek@xilinx.com \
--cc=pbrobinson@gmail.com \
--cc=rfi@lists.rocketboards.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shawn.lin@rock-chips.com \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.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 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.