On 15-06-15, 10:19, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
I ran the kernel compiled from the above ^^ branch. I get data access exception with the following backtrace:
Were you trying to run some tests with it? Or was that just on normal boot?
[ 67.834689] Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x00000008 [ 67.834800] Faulting instruction address: 0xc000000000859708 cpu 0x0: Vector: 300 (Data Access) at [c00000000382b4b0] pc: c000000000859708: dbs_cpufreq_notifier+0x68/0xe0
This belongs to conservative governor..
lr: c000000000100dec: notifier_call_chain+0xbc/0x120 sp: c00000000382b730msr: 9000000100009033 dar: 8 dsisr: 40000000 current = 0xc0000000038876c0 paca = 0xc000000007da0000 softe: 0 irq_happened: 0x01 pid = 737, comm = kworker/0:2 enter ? for help [c00000000382b780] c000000000100dec notifier_call_chain+0xbc/0x120 [c00000000382b7d0] c000000000101638 __srcu_notifier_call_chain+0xa8/0x110 [c00000000382b830] c000000000850844 cpufreq_notify_transition+0x1a4/0x540 [c00000000382b920] c000000000850d1c cpufreq_freq_transition_begin+0x13c/0x180 [c00000000382b9b0] c000000000851958 __cpufreq_driver_target+0x2b8/0x4a0 [c00000000382ba70] c0000000008578b0 od_check_cpu+0x120/0x140 [c00000000382baa0] c00000000085ac7c dbs_check_cpu+0x25c/0x310 [c00000000382bb50] c0000000008580f0 od_dbs_timer+0x120/0x190
... And this is about ondemand governor. Why is the callback getting called for a different governor ?
Well, here is the answer:
From: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:06:36 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: conservative: only manage relevant CPUs's notifier
Conservative governor registers for freq-change notifiers for its functioning. The notifiers layer doesn't have any information about which CPUs to notify for and hence notifies for all CPUs.
Conservative governor might not be managing all present CPUs on a system and so notifications for CPUs which it isn't managing must be discarded.
Compare policy's governor against conservative governor to check this.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org --- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++-- drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c index e0b49729307d..f63a79d6d557 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c @@ -24,6 +24,11 @@ static struct common_dbs_data cs_dbs_cdata; static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s, cs_cpu_dbs_info);
+#ifndef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_CONSERVATIVE +static +#endif +struct cpufreq_governor cpufreq_gov_conservative; + static inline unsigned int get_freq_target(struct cs_dbs_tuners *cs_tuners, struct cpufreq_policy *policy) { @@ -120,8 +125,17 @@ static int dbs_cpufreq_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val, struct cpufreq_freqs *freq = data; struct cs_cpu_dbs_info_s *dbs_info = &per_cpu(cs_cpu_dbs_info, freq->cpu); - struct cpu_common_dbs_info *ccdbs = dbs_info->cdbs.ccdbs; - struct cpufreq_policy *policy = ccdbs->policy; + struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(freq->cpu); + struct cpu_common_dbs_info *ccdbs; + + if (WARN_ON(!policy)) + return -EINVAL; + + /* policy isn't governed by conservative governor */ + if (policy->governor != &cpufreq_gov_conservative) + return 0; + + ccdbs = dbs_info->cdbs.ccdbs;
mutex_lock(&cs_dbs_cdata.mutex); if (!ccdbs->enabled) diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h index 7f651bdf43ae..1c551237ac8d 100644 --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_governor.h @@ -273,4 +273,5 @@ void od_register_powersave_bias_handler(unsigned int (*f) (struct cpufreq_policy *, unsigned int, unsigned int), unsigned int powersave_bias); void od_unregister_powersave_bias_handler(void); +struct cpufreq_policy *cpufreq_cpu_get_raw(unsigned int cpu); #endif /* _CPUFREQ_GOVERNOR_H */
Applies on top of that series, please try once more..
I also get the following lockdep warning just before hitting the above panic.
[ 64.414664] [ 64.414724] ====================================================== [ 64.414810] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] [ 64.414883] 4.1.0-rc7-00513-g3af78d9 #44 Not tainted [ 64.414934] ------------------------------------------------------- [ 64.414998] ppc64_cpu/3378 is trying to acquire lock: [ 64.415049] ((&(&j_cdbs->dwork)->work)){+.+...}, at: [<c0000000000f5848>] flush_work+0x8/0x350 [ 64.415172] [ 64.415172] but task is already holding lock: [ 64.415236] (od_dbs_cdata.mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<c00000000085b3a0>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x80/0x940 [ 64.415366] [ 64.415366] which lock already depends on the new lock. [ 64.415366] [ 64.415443] [ 64.415443] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: [ 64.415518] -> #1 (od_dbs_cdata.mutex){+.+.+.}: [ 64.415608] [<c0000000001489c8>] lock_acquire+0xf8/0x340 [ 64.415674] [<c000000000a6dc28>] mutex_lock_nested+0xb8/0x5b0 [ 64.415752] [<c00000000085b220>] dbs_timer+0x50/0x150 [ 64.415824] [<c0000000000f489c>] process_one_work+0x24c/0x910 [ 64.415909] [<c0000000000f50dc>] worker_thread+0x17c/0x540 [ 64.415981] [<c0000000000fed70>] kthread+0x120/0x140 [ 64.416052] [<c000000000009678>] ret_from_kernel_thread+0x5c/0x64 [ 64.416139] -> #0 ((&(&j_cdbs->dwork)->work)){+.+...}: [ 64.416240] [<c000000000147764>] __lock_acquire+0x1114/0x1990 [ 64.416321] [<c0000000001489c8>] lock_acquire+0xf8/0x340 [ 64.416385] [<c0000000000f58a8>] flush_work+0x68/0x350 [ 64.416453] [<c0000000000f5c74>] __cancel_work_timer+0xe4/0x270 [ 64.416530] [<c00000000085b8d0>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x5b0/0x940 [ 64.416605] [<c000000000857e3c>] od_cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x3c/0x60 [ 64.416684] [<c000000000852b04>] __cpufreq_governor+0xe4/0x320 [ 64.416762] [<c000000000855bb8>] __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare.isra.22+0x78/0x340 [ 64.416851] [<c000000000855f44>] cpufreq_cpu_callback+0xc4/0xe0 [ 64.416928] [<c000000000100dec>] notifier_call_chain+0xbc/0x120 [ 64.417005] [<c00000000025a3bc>] _cpu_down+0xec/0x440 [ 64.417072] [<c00000000025a76c>] cpu_down+0x5c/0xa0 [ 64.417137] [<c00000000064f52c>] cpu_subsys_offline+0x2c/0x50 [ 64.417214] [<c000000000646de4>] device_offline+0x114/0x150 [ 64.417291] [<c000000000646fac>] online_store+0x6c/0xc0 [ 64.417355] [<c000000000642cc8>] dev_attr_store+0x68/0xa0 [ 64.417421] [<c0000000003bfd44>] sysfs_kf_write+0x94/0xc0 [ 64.417488] [<c0000000003be94c>] kernfs_fop_write+0x18c/0x1f0 [ 64.417564] [<c000000000304dfc>] __vfs_write+0x6c/0x190 [ 64.417630] [<c000000000305b10>] vfs_write+0xc0/0x200 [ 64.417694] [<c000000000306b0c>] SyS_write+0x6c/0x110 [ 64.417759] [<c000000000009364>] system_call+0x38/0xd0 [ 64.417823] [ 64.417823] other info that might help us debug this: [ 64.417823] [ 64.417901] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 64.417901] [ 64.417965] CPU0 CPU1 [ 64.418015] ---- ---- [ 64.418065] lock(od_dbs_cdata.mutex); [ 64.418129] lock((&(&j_cdbs->dwork)->work)); [ 64.418217] lock(od_dbs_cdata.mutex); [ 64.418304] lock((&(&j_cdbs->dwork)->work)); [ 64.418368] [ 64.418368] *** DEADLOCK *** [ 64.418368] [ 64.418432] 9 locks held by ppc64_cpu/3378: [ 64.418471] #0: (sb_writers#3){.+.+.+}, at: [<c000000000305c20>] vfs_write+0x1d0/0x200 [ 64.418600] #1: (&of->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<c0000000003be83c>] kernfs_fop_write+0x7c/0x1f0 [ 64.418728] #2: (s_active#54){.+.+.+}, at: [<c0000000003be848>] kernfs_fop_write+0x88/0x1f0 [ 64.418868] #3: (device_hotplug_lock){+.+...}, at: [<c0000000006452e8>] lock_device_hotplug_sysfs+0x28/0x90 [ 64.419009] #4: (&dev->mutex){......}, at: [<c000000000646d60>] device_offline+0x90/0x150 [ 64.419124] #5: (cpu_add_remove_lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<c00000000025a74c>] cpu_down+0x3c/0xa0 [ 64.419252] #6: (cpu_hotplug.lock){++++++}, at: [<c0000000000cb458>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0x8/0x110 [ 64.419382] #7: (cpu_hotplug.lock#2){+.+.+.}, at: [<c0000000000cb4f0>] cpu_hotplug_begin+0xa0/0x110 [ 64.419522] #8: (od_dbs_cdata.mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<c00000000085b3a0>] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x80/0x940 [ 64.419662] [ 64.419662] stack backtrace: [ 64.419716] CPU: 125 PID: 3378 Comm: ppc64_cpu Not tainted 4.1.0-rc7-00513-g3af78d9 #44 [ 64.419795] Call Trace: [ 64.419824] [c000000fbe7832e0] [c000000000a80fe8] dump_stack+0xa0/0xdc (unreliable) [ 64.419913] [c000000fbe783310] [c000000000a7b2e8] print_circular_bug+0x354/0x388 [ 64.420003] [c000000fbe7833b0] [c000000000145480] check_prev_add+0x8c0/0x8d0 [ 64.420080] [c000000fbe7834b0] [c000000000147764] __lock_acquire+0x1114/0x1990 [ 64.420169] [c000000fbe7835d0] [c0000000001489c8] lock_acquire+0xf8/0x340 [ 64.420245] [c000000fbe783690] [c0000000000f58a8] flush_work+0x68/0x350 [ 64.420321] [c000000fbe783780] [c0000000000f5c74] __cancel_work_timer+0xe4/0x270 [ 64.420410] [c000000fbe783810] [c00000000085b8d0] cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x5b0/0x940 [ 64.420499] [c000000fbe7838b0] [c000000000857e3c] od_cpufreq_governor_dbs+0x3c/0x60 [ 64.420588] [c000000fbe7838f0] [c000000000852b04] __cpufreq_governor+0xe4/0x320 [ 64.420678] [c000000fbe783970] [c000000000855bb8] __cpufreq_remove_dev_prepare.isra.22+0x78/0x340 [ 64.420780] [c000000fbe7839f0] [c000000000855f44] cpufreq_cpu_callback+0xc4/0xe0 [ 64.420869] [c000000fbe783a20] [c000000000100dec] notifier_call_chain+0xbc/0x120 [ 64.420957] [c000000fbe783a70] [c00000000025a3bc] _cpu_down+0xec/0x440 [ 64.421034] [c000000fbe783b30] [c00000000025a76c] cpu_down+0x5c/0xa0 [ 64.421110] [c000000fbe783b60] [c00000000064f52c] cpu_subsys_offline+0x2c/0x50 [ 64.421199] [c000000fbe783b90] [c000000000646de4] device_offline+0x114/0x150 [ 64.421275] [c000000fbe783bd0] [c000000000646fac] online_store+0x6c/0xc0 [ 64.421352] [c000000fbe783c20] [c000000000642cc8] dev_attr_store+0x68/0xa0 [ 64.421428] [c000000fbe783c60] [c0000000003bfd44] sysfs_kf_write+0x94/0xc0 [ 64.421504] [c000000fbe783ca0] [c0000000003be94c] kernfs_fop_write+0x18c/0x1f0 [ 64.421594] [c000000fbe783cf0] [c000000000304dfc] __vfs_write+0x6c/0x190 [ 64.421670] [c000000fbe783d90] [c000000000305b10] vfs_write+0xc0/0x200 [ 64.421747] [c000000fbe783de0] [c000000000306b0c] SyS_write+0x6c/0x110
ppc64_cpu is the utility used to perform cpu hotplug.
Sigh.. These ghosts will never leave us. Okay, lets fix this separately. Check if you are getting any crashes that you were getting earlier..