Re: [PATCH RESEND drm-misc-next 4/7] drm/arm/hdlcd: plane: use drm managed resources

[Danilo Krummrich]

Hi Liviu,

On 9/30/22 18:56, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 12:03:58AM +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > Do you mind trying again with my v2 (although v2 shouldn't make a difference
> > for this issue) and provide the back-trace when it hangs?
>
> Hi Danilo,
>
>
> I've finally got a replacement Juno board that it is stable enough.

That's great!

> I've tried your v2 on top of 7860d720a84c ("drm/msm: Fix build break with recent mm tree") which
> is the head of drm-next today and rmmod hangs. /proc/<pid_of_rmmod>/stack shows:

Thanks for taking the time to test the patches and providing this 
stacktrace.

> [<0>] __synchronize_srcu.part.0+0x78/0xec
> [<0>] synchronize_srcu+0xe0/0x134
> [<0>] drm_dev_unplug+0x2c/0x60 [drm]
> [<0>] hdlcd_drm_unbind+0x20/0xc0 [hdlcd]
> [<0>] component_master_del+0xa4/0xc0
> [<0>] hdlcd_remove+0x1c/0x2c [hdlcd]
> [<0>] platform_remove+0x28/0x60
> [<0>] device_remove+0x4c/0x80
> [<0>] device_release_driver_internal+0x1e4/0x250
> [<0>] driver_detach+0x50/0xe0
> [<0>] bus_remove_driver+0x5c/0xbc
> [<0>] driver_unregister+0x30/0x60
> [<0>] platform_driver_unregister+0x14/0x20
> [<0>] hdlcd_platform_driver_exit+0x1c/0xe40 [hdlcd]
> [<0>] __arm64_sys_delete_module+0x18c/0x240
> [<0>] invoke_syscall+0x48/0x114
> [<0>] el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0xcc/0xec
> [<0>] do_el0_svc+0x2c/0xc0
> [<0>] el0_svc+0x2c/0x84
> [<0>] el0t_64_sync_handler+0x11c/0x150
> [<0>] el0t_64_sync+0x18c/0x190

I think I figured it out. I messed up two of the srcu read-side critical 
sections by overlooking alternate return paths within those sections - 
yikes!

I also found a potential use-after-free I accidentally introduced while 
removing the patch in v2.

Finally, I added a patch to remove unnecessary calls to 
drm_mode_config_cleanup() and replaced drm_mode_config_init() with 
drmm_mode_config_init().

I will send you a v3 containing those fixes.

> My quick guess would be that the mixing of managed and unmanaged APIs manages to
> confuse the sleepable RCUs and we get the hang.

I guess you're referring to drm_crtc_init_with_planes() and providing a 
.destroy callback in hdlcd_crtc_funcs. Actually, this .destroy callback 
is handled in the same way as when initializing the crtc with 
drmm_crtc_init_with_planes(), hence I don't think we have a mix of 
managed and unmanaged APIs here.

drmm_crtc_init_with_planes() just calls __drm_crtc_init_with_planes() 
and adds the cleanup via drmm_add_action_or_reset().

Having a .destroy callback registered via drm_crtc_init_with_planes() 
ends up the same way, since drm_mode_config_init() simply calls 
drmm_mode_config_init(), which also registers drm_mode_config_cleanup() 
(ultimately calling the crtc->destroy callback) via 
drmm_add_action_or_reset().

- Danilo

> Will chat with Daniel Vetter next
> week at XDC on what would be the best approach here.
>
> Best regards,
> Liviu