| Message ID | 20210301191940.15247-1-adrian.hunter@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | scsi: ufs: Fix incorrect ufshcd_state after ufshcd_reset_and_restore() | expand |
On Mon, 2021-03-01 at 21:19 +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote: > If ufshcd_probe_hba() fails it sets ufshcd_state to > UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, > however, if it is called again, as it is within a loop in > ufshcd_reset_and_restore(), and succeeds, then it will not set the > state > back to UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL unless the state was > UFSHCD_STATE_RESET. > > That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though > ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero. > > Fix by initializing the state to UFSHCD_STATE_RESET in the start of > each > loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(). If there is an error, > ufshcd_reset_and_restore() will change the state to > UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, > otherwise ufshcd_probe_hba() will have set the state appropriately. > > Fixes: 4db7a2360597 ("scsi: ufs: Fix concurrency of error handler and > other error recovery paths") > Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> We used to directly set hba->ufshcd_state = UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL at the beginning of ufshcd_probe_hba(), and didn't have checkup if (hba- >ufshcd_state == UFSHCD_STATE_RESET). Remove this checkup, also works, but in This loop, it it better that, before going to reset flow, ufshcd_state should be set UFSHCD_STATE_RESET. Reviewed-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>
On Mon, Mar 01 2021 at 11:19 -0800, Adrian Hunter wrote: >If ufshcd_probe_hba() fails it sets ufshcd_state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, >however, if it is called again, as it is within a loop in >ufshcd_reset_and_restore(), and succeeds, then it will not set the state >back to UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL unless the state was >UFSHCD_STATE_RESET. > >That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though >ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero. > >Fix by initializing the state to UFSHCD_STATE_RESET in the start of each >loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(). If there is an error, >ufshcd_reset_and_restore() will change the state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, >otherwise ufshcd_probe_hba() will have set the state appropriately. > >Fixes: 4db7a2360597 ("scsi: ufs: Fix concurrency of error handler and other error recovery paths") >Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> >--- Reviewed-by: Asutosh Das <asutoshd@codeaurora.org> > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > >diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >index 77161750c9fb..91a403afe038 100644 >--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >+++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >@@ -7031,6 +7031,8 @@ static int ufshcd_reset_and_restore(struct ufs_hba *hba) > spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags); > > do { >+ hba->ufshcd_state = UFSHCD_STATE_RESET; >+ > /* Reset the attached device */ > ufshcd_device_reset(hba); > >-- >2.17.1 >
> If ufshcd_probe_hba() fails it sets ufshcd_state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, > however, if it is called again, as it is within a loop in > ufshcd_reset_and_restore(), and succeeds, then it will not set the state > back to UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL unless the state was > UFSHCD_STATE_RESET. > > That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though > ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero. > > Fix by initializing the state to UFSHCD_STATE_RESET in the start of each > loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(). If there is an error, > ufshcd_reset_and_restore() will change the state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, > otherwise ufshcd_probe_hba() will have set the state appropriately. > > Fixes: 4db7a2360597 ("scsi: ufs: Fix concurrency of error handler and other > error recovery paths") > Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> I think that CanG recent series addressed that issue as well, can you take a look? https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1614145010-36079-2-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org/ > --- > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > index 77161750c9fb..91a403afe038 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > @@ -7031,6 +7031,8 @@ static int ufshcd_reset_and_restore(struct ufs_hba > *hba) > spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags); > > do { > + hba->ufshcd_state = UFSHCD_STATE_RESET; > + > /* Reset the attached device */ > ufshcd_device_reset(hba); > > -- > 2.17.1
On 2/03/21 9:01 am, Avri Altman wrote: > >> If ufshcd_probe_hba() fails it sets ufshcd_state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, >> however, if it is called again, as it is within a loop in >> ufshcd_reset_and_restore(), and succeeds, then it will not set the state >> back to UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL unless the state was >> UFSHCD_STATE_RESET. >> >> That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though >> ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero. >> >> Fix by initializing the state to UFSHCD_STATE_RESET in the start of each >> loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(). If there is an error, >> ufshcd_reset_and_restore() will change the state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, >> otherwise ufshcd_probe_hba() will have set the state appropriately. >> >> Fixes: 4db7a2360597 ("scsi: ufs: Fix concurrency of error handler and other >> error recovery paths") >> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> > I think that CanG recent series addressed that issue as well, can you take a look? > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1614145010-36079-2-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org/ Yes, there it is mixed in with other changes. However it is probably better as a separate patch. Can Guo, what do you think? > > >> --- >> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 2 ++ >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >> index 77161750c9fb..91a403afe038 100644 >> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >> @@ -7031,6 +7031,8 @@ static int ufshcd_reset_and_restore(struct ufs_hba >> *hba) >> spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags); >> >> do { >> + hba->ufshcd_state = UFSHCD_STATE_RESET; >> + >> /* Reset the attached device */ >> ufshcd_device_reset(hba); >> >> -- >> 2.17.1 >
On Tue, 2021-03-02 at 10:14 +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote: > > > That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though > > > ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero. > > > > > > Fix by initializing the state to UFSHCD_STATE_RESET in the start > > > of each > > > loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(). If there is an error, > > > ufshcd_reset_and_restore() will change the state to > > > UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, > > > otherwise ufshcd_probe_hba() will have set the state > > > appropriately. > > > > > > Fixes: 4db7a2360597 ("scsi: ufs: Fix concurrency of error handler > > > and other > > > error recovery paths") > > > Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> > > > > I think that CanG recent series addressed that issue as well, can > > you take a look? > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1614145010-36079-2-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org/ > > Yes, there it is mixed in with other changes. However it is probably > better > as a separate patch. Can Guo, what do you think? we can firstly take this fixup patch.
On 2021-03-02 03:19, Adrian Hunter wrote: > If ufshcd_probe_hba() fails it sets ufshcd_state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, > however, if it is called again, as it is within a loop in > ufshcd_reset_and_restore(), and succeeds, then it will not set the > state > back to UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL unless the state was > UFSHCD_STATE_RESET. > > That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though > ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero. > > Fix by initializing the state to UFSHCD_STATE_RESET in the start of > each > loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(). If there is an error, > ufshcd_reset_and_restore() will change the state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, > otherwise ufshcd_probe_hba() will have set the state appropriately. > > Fixes: 4db7a2360597 ("scsi: ufs: Fix concurrency of error handler and > other error recovery paths") > Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> > --- > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > index 77161750c9fb..91a403afe038 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c > @@ -7031,6 +7031,8 @@ static int ufshcd_reset_and_restore(struct > ufs_hba *hba) > spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags); > > do { > + hba->ufshcd_state = UFSHCD_STATE_RESET; > + > /* Reset the attached device */ > ufshcd_device_reset(hba); Hi Adrian, I've proposed a fix to get it addressed - https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1383817/ Thanks, Can Guo.
On 2021-03-02 16:14, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 2/03/21 9:01 am, Avri Altman wrote: >> >>> If ufshcd_probe_hba() fails it sets ufshcd_state to >>> UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, >>> however, if it is called again, as it is within a loop in >>> ufshcd_reset_and_restore(), and succeeds, then it will not set the >>> state >>> back to UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL unless the state was >>> UFSHCD_STATE_RESET. >>> >>> That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though >>> ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero. >>> >>> Fix by initializing the state to UFSHCD_STATE_RESET in the start of >>> each >>> loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(). If there is an error, >>> ufshcd_reset_and_restore() will change the state to >>> UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, >>> otherwise ufshcd_probe_hba() will have set the state appropriately. >>> >>> Fixes: 4db7a2360597 ("scsi: ufs: Fix concurrency of error handler and >>> other >>> error recovery paths") >>> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> >> I think that CanG recent series addressed that issue as well, can you >> take a look? >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1614145010-36079-2-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org/ > > Yes, there it is mixed in with other changes. However it is probably > better > as a separate patch. Can Guo, what do you think? Oh, I missed this one... Sure, I will split it out as a seperate change in next version. Thanks, Can Guo. > >> >> >>> --- >>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 2 ++ >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >>> index 77161750c9fb..91a403afe038 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c >>> @@ -7031,6 +7031,8 @@ static int ufshcd_reset_and_restore(struct >>> ufs_hba >>> *hba) >>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags); >>> >>> do { >>> + hba->ufshcd_state = UFSHCD_STATE_RESET; >>> + >>> /* Reset the attached device */ >>> ufshcd_device_reset(hba); >>> >>> -- >>> 2.17.1 >>
On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 21:19:40 +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote: > If ufshcd_probe_hba() fails it sets ufshcd_state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, > however, if it is called again, as it is within a loop in > ufshcd_reset_and_restore(), and succeeds, then it will not set the state > back to UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL unless the state was > UFSHCD_STATE_RESET. > > That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though > ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero. > > [...] Applied to 5.12/scsi-fixes, thanks! [1/1] scsi: ufs: Fix incorrect ufshcd_state after ufshcd_reset_and_restore() https://git.kernel.org/mkp/scsi/c/02c2fc6acc43
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c index 77161750c9fb..91a403afe038 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c @@ -7031,6 +7031,8 @@ static int ufshcd_reset_and_restore(struct ufs_hba *hba) spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags); do { + hba->ufshcd_state = UFSHCD_STATE_RESET; + /* Reset the attached device */ ufshcd_device_reset(hba);
If ufshcd_probe_hba() fails it sets ufshcd_state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, however, if it is called again, as it is within a loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(), and succeeds, then it will not set the state back to UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL unless the state was UFSHCD_STATE_RESET. That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero. Fix by initializing the state to UFSHCD_STATE_RESET in the start of each loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(). If there is an error, ufshcd_reset_and_restore() will change the state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR, otherwise ufshcd_probe_hba() will have set the state appropriately. Fixes: 4db7a2360597 ("scsi: ufs: Fix concurrency of error handler and other error recovery paths") Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> --- drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)