This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 5, 2018. It is now read-only.
mmc: dw_mmc: correct bus_hz #37
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
fix typo introduced from commit 0f7950e (mmc: dw_mmc: fix warning of clk_prepare_enable/clk_disable_unprepare) host->bus_hz should be biu_clk, which has been set to 25M Signed-off-by: Zhangfei Gao <[email protected]>
|
merged manually |
docularxu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 26, 2015
Fixes the following lockdep splat: [ 1.244527] ============================================= [ 1.245193] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] [ 1.245193] 4.2.0-rc1+ #37 Not tainted [ 1.245193] --------------------------------------------- [ 1.245193] cp/742 is trying to acquire lock: [ 1.245193] (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] but task is already holding lock: [ 1.245193] (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81198e7f>] path_openat+0x3af/0x1280 [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] other info that might help us debug this: [ 1.245193] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] CPU0 [ 1.245193] ---- [ 1.245193] lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9); [ 1.245193] lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9); [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] *** DEADLOCK *** [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] May be due to missing lock nesting notation [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] 2 locks held by cp/742: [ 1.245193] #0: (sb_writers#5){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff811ad37f>] mnt_want_write+0x1f/0x50 [ 1.245193] #1: (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81198e7f>] path_openat+0x3af/0x1280 [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] stack backtrace: [ 1.245193] CPU: 2 PID: 742 Comm: cp Not tainted 4.2.0-rc1+ #37 [ 1.245193] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.7.5-0-ge51488c-20140816_022509-build35 04/01/2014 [ 1.245193] ffffffff8252d530 ffff88007b023a38 ffffffff814f6f49 ffffffff810b56c5 [ 1.245193] ffff88007c30cc80 ffff88007b023af8 ffffffff810a150d ffff88007b023a68 [ 1.245193] 000000008101302a ffff880000000000 00000008f447e23f ffffffff8252d500 [ 1.245193] Call Trace: [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff814f6f49>] dump_stack+0x4c/0x65 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff810b56c5>] ? console_unlock+0x1c5/0x510 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff810a150d>] __lock_acquire+0x1a6d/0x1ea0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8109fa78>] ? __lock_is_held+0x58/0x80 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff810a1a93>] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x270 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ? ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff814fc83b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x6b/0x3a0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ? ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ? ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8128e286>] ubifs_create+0xa6/0x1f0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81198e7f>] ? path_openat+0x3af/0x1280 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81195d15>] vfs_create+0x95/0xc0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8119929c>] path_openat+0x7cc/0x1280 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8109ffe3>] ? __lock_acquire+0x543/0x1ea0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81088f20>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0x90/0xc0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81088c00>] ? calc_global_load_tick+0x60/0x90 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81088f20>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0x90/0xc0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff811a9cef>] ? __alloc_fd+0xaf/0x180 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8119ac55>] do_filp_open+0x75/0xd0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff814ffd86>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x26/0x40 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff811a9cef>] ? __alloc_fd+0xaf/0x180 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81189bd9>] do_sys_open+0x129/0x200 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81189cc9>] SyS_open+0x19/0x20 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81500717>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x12/0x6f While the lockdep splat is a false positive, becuase path_openat holds i_mutex of the parent directory and ubifs_init_security() tries to acquire i_mutex of a new inode, it reveals that taking i_mutex in ubifs_init_security() is in vain because it is only being called in the inode allocation path and therefore nobody else can see the inode yet. Cc: [email protected] # 3.20- Reported-and-tested-by: Boris Brezillon <[email protected]> Reviewed-and-tested-by: Dongsheng Yang <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: [email protected]
johnstultz-work
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 5, 2016
commit ecf5fc6 upstream. Nikolay has reported a hang when a memcg reclaim got stuck with the following backtrace: PID: 18308 TASK: ffff883d7c9b0a30 CPU: 1 COMMAND: "rsync" #0 __schedule at ffffffff815ab152 #1 schedule at ffffffff815ab76e #2 schedule_timeout at ffffffff815ae5e5 #3 io_schedule_timeout at ffffffff815aad6a #4 bit_wait_io at ffffffff815abfc6 #5 __wait_on_bit at ffffffff815abda5 #6 wait_on_page_bit at ffffffff8111fd4f #7 shrink_page_list at ffffffff81135445 #8 shrink_inactive_list at ffffffff81135845 #9 shrink_lruvec at ffffffff81135ead #10 shrink_zone at ffffffff811360c3 #11 shrink_zones at ffffffff81136eff #12 do_try_to_free_pages at ffffffff8113712f #13 try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages at ffffffff811372be #14 try_charge at ffffffff81189423 #15 mem_cgroup_try_charge at ffffffff8118c6f5 #16 __add_to_page_cache_locked at ffffffff8112137d #17 add_to_page_cache_lru at ffffffff81121618 #18 pagecache_get_page at ffffffff8112170b #19 grow_dev_page at ffffffff811c8297 #20 __getblk_slow at ffffffff811c91d6 #21 __getblk_gfp at ffffffff811c92c1 #22 ext4_ext_grow_indepth at ffffffff8124565c #23 ext4_ext_create_new_leaf at ffffffff81246ca8 #24 ext4_ext_insert_extent at ffffffff81246f09 #25 ext4_ext_map_blocks at ffffffff8124a848 #26 ext4_map_blocks at ffffffff8121a5b7 #27 mpage_map_one_extent at ffffffff8121b1fa #28 mpage_map_and_submit_extent at ffffffff8121f07b #29 ext4_writepages at ffffffff8121f6d5 #30 do_writepages at ffffffff8112c490 #31 __filemap_fdatawrite_range at ffffffff81120199 #32 filemap_flush at ffffffff8112041c #33 ext4_alloc_da_blocks at ffffffff81219da1 #34 ext4_rename at ffffffff81229b91 #35 ext4_rename2 at ffffffff81229e32 #36 vfs_rename at ffffffff811a08a5 #37 SYSC_renameat2 at ffffffff811a3ffc #38 sys_renameat2 at ffffffff811a408e #39 sys_rename at ffffffff8119e51e #40 system_call_fastpath at ffffffff815afa89 Dave Chinner has properly pointed out that this is a deadlock in the reclaim code because ext4 doesn't submit pages which are marked by PG_writeback right away. The heuristic was introduced by commit e62e384 ("memcg: prevent OOM with too many dirty pages") and it was applied only when may_enter_fs was specified. The code has been changed by c3b94f4 ("memcg: further prevent OOM with too many dirty pages") which has removed the __GFP_FS restriction with a reasoning that we do not get into the fs code. But this is not sufficient apparently because the fs doesn't necessarily submit pages marked PG_writeback for IO right away. ext4_bio_write_page calls io_submit_add_bh but that doesn't necessarily submit the bio. Instead it tries to map more pages into the bio and mpage_map_one_extent might trigger memcg charge which might end up waiting on a page which is marked PG_writeback but hasn't been submitted yet so we would end up waiting for something that never finishes. Fix this issue by replacing __GFP_IO by may_enter_fs check (for case 2) before we go to wait on the writeback. The page fault path, which is the only path that triggers memcg oom killer since 3.12, shouldn't require GFP_NOFS and so we shouldn't reintroduce the premature OOM killer issue which was originally addressed by the heuristic. As per David Chinner the xfs is doing similar thing since 2.6.15 already so ext4 is not the only affected filesystem. Moreover he notes: : For example: IO completion might require unwritten extent conversion : which executes filesystem transactions and GFP_NOFS allocations. The : writeback flag on the pages can not be cleared until unwritten : extent conversion completes. Hence memory reclaim cannot wait on : page writeback to complete in GFP_NOFS context because it is not : safe to do so, memcg reclaim or otherwise. Cc: [email protected] # 3.9+ [[email protected]: corrected the control flow] Fixes: c3b94f4 ("memcg: further prevent OOM with too many dirty pages") Reported-by: Nikolay Borisov <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
johnstultz-work
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 5, 2016
commit cf6f54e upstream. Fixes the following lockdep splat: [ 1.244527] ============================================= [ 1.245193] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] [ 1.245193] 4.2.0-rc1+ #37 Not tainted [ 1.245193] --------------------------------------------- [ 1.245193] cp/742 is trying to acquire lock: [ 1.245193] (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] but task is already holding lock: [ 1.245193] (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81198e7f>] path_openat+0x3af/0x1280 [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] other info that might help us debug this: [ 1.245193] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] CPU0 [ 1.245193] ---- [ 1.245193] lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9); [ 1.245193] lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9); [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] *** DEADLOCK *** [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] May be due to missing lock nesting notation [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] 2 locks held by cp/742: [ 1.245193] #0: (sb_writers#5){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff811ad37f>] mnt_want_write+0x1f/0x50 [ 1.245193] #1: (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81198e7f>] path_openat+0x3af/0x1280 [ 1.245193] [ 1.245193] stack backtrace: [ 1.245193] CPU: 2 PID: 742 Comm: cp Not tainted 4.2.0-rc1+ #37 [ 1.245193] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.7.5-0-ge51488c-20140816_022509-build35 04/01/2014 [ 1.245193] ffffffff8252d530 ffff88007b023a38 ffffffff814f6f49 ffffffff810b56c5 [ 1.245193] ffff88007c30cc80 ffff88007b023af8 ffffffff810a150d ffff88007b023a68 [ 1.245193] 000000008101302a ffff880000000000 00000008f447e23f ffffffff8252d500 [ 1.245193] Call Trace: [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff814f6f49>] dump_stack+0x4c/0x65 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff810b56c5>] ? console_unlock+0x1c5/0x510 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff810a150d>] __lock_acquire+0x1a6d/0x1ea0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8109fa78>] ? __lock_is_held+0x58/0x80 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff810a1a93>] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x270 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ? ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff814fc83b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x6b/0x3a0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ? ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ? ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8128e286>] ubifs_create+0xa6/0x1f0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81198e7f>] ? path_openat+0x3af/0x1280 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81195d15>] vfs_create+0x95/0xc0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8119929c>] path_openat+0x7cc/0x1280 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8109ffe3>] ? __lock_acquire+0x543/0x1ea0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81088f20>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0x90/0xc0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81088c00>] ? calc_global_load_tick+0x60/0x90 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81088f20>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0x90/0xc0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff811a9cef>] ? __alloc_fd+0xaf/0x180 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff8119ac55>] do_filp_open+0x75/0xd0 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff814ffd86>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x26/0x40 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff811a9cef>] ? __alloc_fd+0xaf/0x180 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81189bd9>] do_sys_open+0x129/0x200 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81189cc9>] SyS_open+0x19/0x20 [ 1.245193] [<ffffffff81500717>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x12/0x6f While the lockdep splat is a false positive, becuase path_openat holds i_mutex of the parent directory and ubifs_init_security() tries to acquire i_mutex of a new inode, it reveals that taking i_mutex in ubifs_init_security() is in vain because it is only being called in the inode allocation path and therefore nobody else can see the inode yet. Reported-and-tested-by: Boris Brezillon <[email protected]> Reviewed-and-tested-by: Dongsheng Yang <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: [email protected] Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
idlethread
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 21, 2016
commit 3b65428 upstream. Even though hid_hw_* checks that passed in data_len is less than HID_MAX_BUFFER_SIZE it is not enough, as i2c-hid does not necessarily allocate buffers of HID_MAX_BUFFER_SIZE but rather checks all device reports and select largest size. In-kernel users normally just send as much data as report needs, so there is no problem, but hidraw users can do whatever they please: BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in memcpy+0x34/0x54 at addr ffffffc07135ea80 Write of size 4101 by task syz-executor/8747 CPU: 2 PID: 8747 Comm: syz-executor Tainted: G BU 3.18.0 #37 Hardware name: Google Tegra210 Smaug Rev 1,3+ (DT) Call trace: [<ffffffc00020ebcc>] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x258 arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c:83 [<ffffffc00020ee40>] show_stack+0x1c/0x2c arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c:172 [< inline >] __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:15 [<ffffffc001958114>] dump_stack+0x90/0x140 lib/dump_stack.c:50 [< inline >] print_error_description mm/kasan/report.c:97 [< inline >] kasan_report_error mm/kasan/report.c:278 [<ffffffc0004597dc>] kasan_report+0x268/0x530 mm/kasan/report.c:305 [<ffffffc0004592e8>] __asan_storeN+0x20/0x150 mm/kasan/kasan.c:718 [<ffffffc0004594e0>] memcpy+0x30/0x54 mm/kasan/kasan.c:299 [<ffffffc001306354>] __i2c_hid_command+0x2b0/0x7b4 drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid.c:178 [< inline >] i2c_hid_set_or_send_report drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid.c:321 [<ffffffc0013079a0>] i2c_hid_output_raw_report.isra.2+0x3d4/0x4b8 drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid.c:589 [<ffffffc001307ad8>] i2c_hid_output_report+0x54/0x68 drivers/hid/i2c-hid/i2c-hid.c:602 [< inline >] hid_hw_output_report include/linux/hid.h:1039 [<ffffffc0012cc7a0>] hidraw_send_report+0x400/0x414 drivers/hid/hidraw.c:154 [<ffffffc0012cc7f4>] hidraw_write+0x40/0x64 drivers/hid/hidraw.c:177 [<ffffffc0004681dc>] vfs_write+0x1d4/0x3cc fs/read_write.c:534 [< inline >] SYSC_pwrite64 fs/read_write.c:627 [<ffffffc000468984>] SyS_pwrite64+0xec/0x144 fs/read_write.c:614 Object at ffffffc07135ea80, in cache kmalloc-512 Object allocated with size 268 bytes. Let's check data length against the buffer size before attempting to copy data over. Reported-by: Alexander Potapenko <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Benjamin Tissoires <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
docularxu
referenced
this pull request
in 96boards-hikey/linux
Jul 28, 2016
[ 40.467381] ============================================= [ 40.473013] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ] [ 40.478651] 4.6.0-08691-g7f3db9a #37 Not tainted [ 40.483466] --------------------------------------------- [ 40.489098] usb/733 is trying to acquire lock: [ 40.493734] (&(&dev->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<bf129288>] ep0_complete+0x18/0xdc [gadgetfs] [ 40.502882] [ 40.502882] but task is already holding lock: [ 40.508967] (&(&dev->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<bf12a420>] ep0_read+0x20/0x5e0 [gadgetfs] [ 40.517811] [ 40.517811] other info that might help us debug this: [ 40.524623] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 40.524623] [ 40.530798] CPU0 [ 40.533346] ---- [ 40.535894] lock(&(&dev->lock)->rlock); [ 40.540088] lock(&(&dev->lock)->rlock); [ 40.544284] [ 40.544284] *** DEADLOCK *** [ 40.544284] [ 40.550461] May be due to missing lock nesting notation [ 40.550461] [ 40.557544] 2 locks held by usb/733: [ 40.561271] #0: (&f->f_pos_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c02a6114>] __fdget_pos+0x40/0x48 [ 40.569219] #1: (&(&dev->lock)->rlock){-.....}, at: [<bf12a420>] ep0_read+0x20/0x5e0 [gadgetfs] [ 40.578523] [ 40.578523] stack backtrace: [ 40.583075] CPU: 0 PID: 733 Comm: usb Not tainted 4.6.0-08691-g7f3db9a #37 [ 40.590246] Hardware name: Generic AM33XX (Flattened Device Tree) [ 40.596625] [<c010ffbc>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010c1bc>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14) [ 40.604718] [<c010c1bc>] (show_stack) from [<c04207fc>] (dump_stack+0xb0/0xe4) [ 40.612267] [<c04207fc>] (dump_stack) from [<c01886ec>] (__lock_acquire+0xf68/0x1994) [ 40.620440] [<c01886ec>] (__lock_acquire) from [<c0189528>] (lock_acquire+0xd8/0x238) [ 40.628621] [<c0189528>] (lock_acquire) from [<c06ad6b4>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x38/0x4c) [ 40.637440] [<c06ad6b4>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave) from [<bf129288>] (ep0_complete+0x18/0xdc [gadgetfs]) [ 40.647339] [<bf129288>] (ep0_complete [gadgetfs]) from [<bf10a728>] (musb_g_giveback+0x118/0x1b0 [musb_hdrc]) [ 40.657842] [<bf10a728>] (musb_g_giveback [musb_hdrc]) from [<bf108768>] (musb_g_ep0_queue+0x16c/0x188 [musb_hdrc]) [ 40.668772] [<bf108768>] (musb_g_ep0_queue [musb_hdrc]) from [<bf12a944>] (ep0_read+0x544/0x5e0 [gadgetfs]) [ 40.678963] [<bf12a944>] (ep0_read [gadgetfs]) from [<c0284470>] (__vfs_read+0x20/0x110) [ 40.687414] [<c0284470>] (__vfs_read) from [<c0285324>] (vfs_read+0x88/0x114) [ 40.694864] [<c0285324>] (vfs_read) from [<c0286150>] (SyS_read+0x44/0x9c) [ 40.702051] [<c0286150>] (SyS_read) from [<c0107820>] (ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x1c) This is caused by the spinlock bug in ep0_read(). Fix the two other deadlock sources in gadgetfs_setup() too. Cc: <[email protected]> # v3.16+ Signed-off-by: Bin Liu <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
fix typo introduced from commit 0f7950e
(mmc: dw_mmc: fix warning of clk_prepare_enable/clk_disable_unprepare)
host->bus_hz should be biu_clk, which has been set to 25M
Signed-off-by: Zhangfei Gao [email protected]