diff mbox

[v4,1/4,media] davinci: vpif_capture: don't lock over s_stream

Message ID 20161129235712.29846-2-khilman@baylibre.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Kevin Hilman Nov. 29, 2016, 11:57 p.m. UTC
Video capture subdevs may be over I2C and may sleep during xfer, so we
cannot do IRQ-disabled locking when calling the subdev.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
---
 drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

Comments

Laurent Pinchart Nov. 30, 2016, 8:32 a.m. UTC | #1
Hi Kevin,

Thank you for the patch.

On Tuesday 29 Nov 2016 15:57:09 Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Video capture subdevs may be over I2C and may sleep during xfer, so we
> cannot do IRQ-disabled locking when calling the subdev.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
> ---
>  drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
> b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c index
> 5104cc0ee40e..9f8f41c0f251 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
> @@ -193,7 +193,10 @@ static int vpif_start_streaming(struct vb2_queue *vq,
> unsigned int count) }
>  	}
> 
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->irqlock, flags);
>  	ret = v4l2_subdev_call(ch->sd, video, s_stream, 1);
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&common->irqlock, flags);

I always get anxious when I see a spinlock being released randomly with an 
operation in the middle of a protected section. Looking at the code it looks 
like the spinlock is abused here. irqlock should only protect the dma_queue 
and should thus only be taken around the following code:

spin_lock_irqsave(&common->irqlock, flags);
/* Get the next frame from the buffer queue */
common->cur_frm = common->next_frm = list_entry(common->dma_queue.next,
                            struct vpif_cap_buffer, list);
/* Remove buffer from the buffer queue */
list_del(&common->cur_frm->list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->irqlock, flags);

The code that is currently protected by the lock in the start and stop 
streaming functions should be protected by a mutex instead.

> +
>  	if (ret && ret != -ENOIOCTLCMD && ret != -ENODEV) {
>  		vpif_dbg(1, debug, "stream on failed in subdev\n");
>  		goto err;
Kevin Hilman Dec. 6, 2016, 4:49 p.m. UTC | #2
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> writes:

> Hi Kevin,
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> On Tuesday 29 Nov 2016 15:57:09 Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Video capture subdevs may be over I2C and may sleep during xfer, so we
>> cannot do IRQ-disabled locking when calling the subdev.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c | 3 +++
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
>> b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c index
>> 5104cc0ee40e..9f8f41c0f251 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
>> @@ -193,7 +193,10 @@ static int vpif_start_streaming(struct vb2_queue *vq,
>> unsigned int count) }
>>  	}
>> 
>> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->irqlock, flags);
>>  	ret = v4l2_subdev_call(ch->sd, video, s_stream, 1);
>> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&common->irqlock, flags);
>
> I always get anxious when I see a spinlock being released randomly with an 
> operation in the middle of a protected section. Looking at the code it looks 
> like the spinlock is abused here. irqlock should only protect the dma_queue 
> and should thus only be taken around the following code:
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&common->irqlock, flags);
> /* Get the next frame from the buffer queue */
> common->cur_frm = common->next_frm = list_entry(common->dma_queue.next,
>                             struct vpif_cap_buffer, list);
> /* Remove buffer from the buffer queue */
> list_del(&common->cur_frm->list);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->irqlock, flags);

Yes, that looks correct.  Will update.

> The code that is currently protected by the lock in the start and stop 
> streaming functions should be protected by a mutex instead.

I tried taking the mutex here, but lockdep pointed out a deadlock.  I
may not be fully understanding the V4L2 internals here, but it seems
that the ioctl is already taking a mutex, so taking it again in
start/stop streaming is a deadlock.  Unless you think the locking should
be nested here, it seems to me that the mutex isn't needed.

Kevin
Laurent Pinchart Dec. 7, 2016, 3:47 p.m. UTC | #3
Hi Kevin,

On Tuesday 06 Dec 2016 08:49:38 Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Laurent Pinchart writes:
> > On Tuesday 29 Nov 2016 15:57:09 Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >> Video capture subdevs may be over I2C and may sleep during xfer, so we
> >> cannot do IRQ-disabled locking when calling the subdev.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c | 3 +++
> >>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
> >> b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c index
> >> 5104cc0ee40e..9f8f41c0f251 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
> >> @@ -193,7 +193,10 @@ static int vpif_start_streaming(struct vb2_queue
> >> *vq, unsigned int count)
> >>  		}
> >>  	}
> >> 
> >> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->irqlock, flags);
> >>  	ret = v4l2_subdev_call(ch->sd, video, s_stream, 1);
> >> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&common->irqlock, flags);
> > 
> > I always get anxious when I see a spinlock being released randomly with an
> > operation in the middle of a protected section. Looking at the code it
> > looks like the spinlock is abused here. irqlock should only protect the
> > dma_queue and should thus only be taken around the following code:
> > 
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&common->irqlock, flags);
> > /* Get the next frame from the buffer queue */
> > common->cur_frm = common->next_frm = list_entry(common->dma_queue.next,
> >                             struct vpif_cap_buffer, list);
> > 
> > /* Remove buffer from the buffer queue */
> > list_del(&common->cur_frm->list);
> > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->irqlock, flags);
> 
> Yes, that looks correct.  Will update.
> 
> > The code that is currently protected by the lock in the start and stop
> > streaming functions should be protected by a mutex instead.
> 
> I tried taking the mutex here, but lockdep pointed out a deadlock.  I
> may not be fully understanding the V4L2 internals here, but it seems
> that the ioctl is already taking a mutex, so taking it again in
> start/stop streaming is a deadlock.  Unless you think the locking should
> be nested here, it seems to me that the mutex isn't needed.

The V4L2 core can lock all ioctls using struct video_device::lock. For buffer-
related ioctls, it can optionally use a separate lock from struct 
vb2_queue::lock. See v4l2_ioctl_get_lock() in drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-
ioctl.c.

The vpif-capture driver sets both the video_device and vb2_queue locks to the 
same lock (which would have the same effect as leaving the vb2_queue lock 
NULL). All ioctls are thus serialized. You would only need to handle locking 
in start_streaming and stop_streaming manually if you didn't rely on the core 
serializing the ioctls.
Kevin Hilman Dec. 7, 2016, 4:06 p.m. UTC | #4
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> writes:

 > Hi Kevin,
>
> On Tuesday 06 Dec 2016 08:49:38 Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Laurent Pinchart writes:
>> > On Tuesday 29 Nov 2016 15:57:09 Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> >> Video capture subdevs may be over I2C and may sleep during xfer, so we
>> >> cannot do IRQ-disabled locking when calling the subdev.
>> >> 
>> >> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
>> >> ---
>> >>  drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c | 3 +++
>> >>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>> >> 
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
>> >> b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c index
>> >> 5104cc0ee40e..9f8f41c0f251 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
>> >> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
>> >> @@ -193,7 +193,10 @@ static int vpif_start_streaming(struct vb2_queue
>> >> *vq, unsigned int count)
>> >>  		}
>> >>  	}
>> >> 
>> >> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->irqlock, flags);
>> >>  	ret = v4l2_subdev_call(ch->sd, video, s_stream, 1);
>> >> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&common->irqlock, flags);
>> > 
>> > I always get anxious when I see a spinlock being released randomly with an
>> > operation in the middle of a protected section. Looking at the code it
>> > looks like the spinlock is abused here. irqlock should only protect the
>> > dma_queue and should thus only be taken around the following code:
>> > 
>> > spin_lock_irqsave(&common->irqlock, flags);
>> > /* Get the next frame from the buffer queue */
>> > common->cur_frm = common->next_frm = list_entry(common->dma_queue.next,
>> >                             struct vpif_cap_buffer, list);
>> > 
>> > /* Remove buffer from the buffer queue */
>> > list_del(&common->cur_frm->list);
>> > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->irqlock, flags);
>> 
>> Yes, that looks correct.  Will update.
>> 
>> > The code that is currently protected by the lock in the start and stop
>> > streaming functions should be protected by a mutex instead.
>> 
>> I tried taking the mutex here, but lockdep pointed out a deadlock.  I
>> may not be fully understanding the V4L2 internals here, but it seems
>> that the ioctl is already taking a mutex, so taking it again in
>> start/stop streaming is a deadlock.  Unless you think the locking should
>> be nested here, it seems to me that the mutex isn't needed.
>
> The V4L2 core can lock all ioctls using struct video_device::lock. For buffer-
> related ioctls, it can optionally use a separate lock from struct 
> vb2_queue::lock. See v4l2_ioctl_get_lock() in drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-
> ioctl.c.
>
> The vpif-capture driver sets both the video_device and vb2_queue locks to the 
> same lock (which would have the same effect as leaving the vb2_queue lock 
> NULL). All ioctls are thus serialized. You would only need to handle locking 
> in start_streaming and stop_streaming manually if you didn't rely on the core 
> serializing the ioctls.

OK, thanks for clarifying how that works.

Kevin
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
index 5104cc0ee40e..9f8f41c0f251 100644
--- a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
+++ b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpif_capture.c
@@ -193,7 +193,10 @@  static int vpif_start_streaming(struct vb2_queue *vq, unsigned int count)
 		}
 	}
 
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->irqlock, flags);
 	ret = v4l2_subdev_call(ch->sd, video, s_stream, 1);
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&common->irqlock, flags);
+
 	if (ret && ret != -ENOIOCTLCMD && ret != -ENODEV) {
 		vpif_dbg(1, debug, "stream on failed in subdev\n");
 		goto err;