[PATCH] regmap: maple: Drop the RCU read lock while syncing registers
Unfortunately the maple tree requires us to explicitly lock it so we need to take the RCU read lock while iterating. When syncing this means that we end up trying to write out register values while holding the RCU read lock which triggers lockdep issues since that is an atomic context but most buses can't be used in atomic context. Pause the iteration and drop the lock for each register we check to avoid this.
Reported-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org --- drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c b/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c index 9b1b559107ef..c2e3a0f6c218 100644 --- a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c +++ b/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c @@ -203,15 +203,18 @@ static int regcache_maple_sync(struct regmap *map, unsigned int min,
mas_for_each(&mas, entry, max) { for (r = max(mas.index, lmin); r <= min(mas.last, lmax); r++) { + mas_pause(&mas); + rcu_read_unlock(); ret = regcache_sync_val(map, r, entry[r - mas.index]); if (ret != 0) goto out; + rcu_read_lock(); } }
-out: rcu_read_unlock();
+out: map->cache_bypass = false;
return ret;
--- base-commit: 44c026a73be8038f03dbdeef028b642880cf1511 change-id: 20230523-regcache-maple-sync-lock-57ea356dc60b
Best regards,
On 5/23/23 17:18, Mark Brown wrote:
Unfortunately the maple tree requires us to explicitly lock it so we need to take the RCU read lock while iterating. When syncing this means that we end up trying to write out register values while holding the RCU read lock which triggers lockdep issues since that is an atomic context but most buses can't be used in atomic context. Pause the iteration and drop the lock for each register we check to avoid this.
Reported-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com
Closes: https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/issues/4371 Tested-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org
drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c b/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c index 9b1b559107ef..c2e3a0f6c218 100644 --- a/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c +++ b/drivers/base/regmap/regcache-maple.c @@ -203,15 +203,18 @@ static int regcache_maple_sync(struct regmap *map, unsigned int min,
mas_for_each(&mas, entry, max) { for (r = max(mas.index, lmin); r <= min(mas.last, lmax); r++) {
mas_pause(&mas);rcu_read_unlock(); ret = regcache_sync_val(map, r, entry[r - mas.index]); if (ret != 0) goto out;rcu_read_lock();-out: rcu_read_unlock();
+out: map->cache_bypass = false;
return ret;
base-commit: 44c026a73be8038f03dbdeef028b642880cf1511 change-id: 20230523-regcache-maple-sync-lock-57ea356dc60b
Best regards,
On Tue, 23 May 2023 23:18:19 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
Unfortunately the maple tree requires us to explicitly lock it so we need to take the RCU read lock while iterating. When syncing this means that we end up trying to write out register values while holding the RCU read lock which triggers lockdep issues since that is an atomic context but most buses can't be used in atomic context. Pause the iteration and drop the lock for each register we check to avoid this.
[...]
Applied to
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regmap.git for-next
Thanks!
[1/1] regmap: maple: Drop the RCU read lock while syncing registers commit: 0cc6578048e0980d254aee345130cced4912f723
All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.
You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.
If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing patches will not be replaced.
Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying to this mail.
Thanks, Mark
participants (2)
-
Mark Brown -
Pierre-Louis Bossart