ASoC:SOF remove duplicated defines #217
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
there are duplicated defines HDA_DSP_ADSPIS_CL_DMA HDA_DSP_ADSPIC_CL_DMA the defines HDA_SKL_ADSP_FW_STATUS and HDA_DSP_SRAM_REG_ROM_STATUS_SKL are the same Signed-off-by: Zhu Yingjiang <[email protected]>
lgirdwood
approved these changes
Oct 29, 2018
plbossart
approved these changes
Oct 29, 2018
plbossart
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 5, 2021
While testing the error paths of relocation I hit the following lockdep splat: ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.10.0-rc6+ #217 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ mount/779 is trying to acquire lock: ffffa0e676945418 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 but task is already holding lock: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #2 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}: down_read_nested+0x43/0x130 __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x31/0x40 btrfs_search_slot+0x462/0x8f0 btrfs_update_root+0x55/0x2b0 btrfs_drop_snapshot+0x398/0x750 clean_dirty_subvols+0xdf/0x120 btrfs_recover_relocation+0x534/0x5a0 btrfs_start_pre_rw_mount+0xcb/0x170 open_ctree+0x151f/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #1 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}: start_transaction+0x444/0x700 insert_balance_item.isra.0+0x37/0x320 btrfs_balance+0x354/0xf40 btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x2cf/0x380 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x83/0xb0 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #0 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: &fs_info->balance_mutex --> sb_internal#2 --> btrfs-root-00 Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(sb_internal#2); lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); *** DEADLOCK *** 2 locks held by mount/779: #0: ffffa0e60dc040e0 (&type->s_umount_key#47/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: alloc_super+0xb5/0x380 #1: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 779 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.10.0-rc6+ #217 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014 Call Trace: dump_stack+0x8b/0xb0 check_noncircular+0xcf/0xf0 ? trace_call_bpf+0x139/0x260 __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 ? kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x2c4/0x2f0 ? btrfs_get_64+0x5e/0x100 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 ? __kmalloc_track_caller+0x2f2/0x320 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 ? capable+0x3a/0x60 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 This is straightforward to fix, simply release the path before we setup the balance_ctl. CC: [email protected] # 4.4+ Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
aiChaoSONG
pushed a commit
to aiChaoSONG/linux
that referenced
this pull request
May 6, 2021
Expose `signal_pending` and `cond_resched` to drivers.
ranj063
pushed a commit
to ranj063/linux
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2021
commit fb28610 upstream. While testing the error paths of relocation I hit the following lockdep splat: ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.10.0-rc6+ thesofproject#217 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ mount/779 is trying to acquire lock: ffffa0e676945418 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 but task is already holding lock: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #2 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}: down_read_nested+0x43/0x130 __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x31/0x40 btrfs_search_slot+0x462/0x8f0 btrfs_update_root+0x55/0x2b0 btrfs_drop_snapshot+0x398/0x750 clean_dirty_subvols+0xdf/0x120 btrfs_recover_relocation+0x534/0x5a0 btrfs_start_pre_rw_mount+0xcb/0x170 open_ctree+0x151f/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #1 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}: start_transaction+0x444/0x700 insert_balance_item.isra.0+0x37/0x320 btrfs_balance+0x354/0xf40 btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x2cf/0x380 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x83/0xb0 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #0 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: &fs_info->balance_mutex --> sb_internal#2 --> btrfs-root-00 Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(sb_internal#2); lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); *** DEADLOCK *** 2 locks held by mount/779: #0: ffffa0e60dc040e0 (&type->s_umount_key#47/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: alloc_super+0xb5/0x380 #1: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 779 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.10.0-rc6+ thesofproject#217 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014 Call Trace: dump_stack+0x8b/0xb0 check_noncircular+0xcf/0xf0 ? trace_call_bpf+0x139/0x260 __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 ? kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x2c4/0x2f0 ? btrfs_get_64+0x5e/0x100 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 ? __kmalloc_track_caller+0x2f2/0x320 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 ? capable+0x3a/0x60 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 This is straightforward to fix, simply release the path before we setup the balance_ctl. CC: [email protected] # 4.4+ Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
IulianOlaru249
pushed a commit
to IulianOlaru249/linux
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 16, 2022
commit fb28610 upstream. While testing the error paths of relocation I hit the following lockdep splat: ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.10.0-rc6+ thesofproject#217 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ mount/779 is trying to acquire lock: ffffa0e676945418 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 but task is already holding lock: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #2 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}: down_read_nested+0x43/0x130 __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x31/0x40 btrfs_search_slot+0x462/0x8f0 btrfs_update_root+0x55/0x2b0 btrfs_drop_snapshot+0x398/0x750 clean_dirty_subvols+0xdf/0x120 btrfs_recover_relocation+0x534/0x5a0 btrfs_start_pre_rw_mount+0xcb/0x170 open_ctree+0x151f/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #1 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}: start_transaction+0x444/0x700 insert_balance_item.isra.0+0x37/0x320 btrfs_balance+0x354/0xf40 btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x2cf/0x380 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x83/0xb0 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #0 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: &fs_info->balance_mutex --> sb_internal#2 --> btrfs-root-00 Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(sb_internal#2); lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); *** DEADLOCK *** 2 locks held by mount/779: #0: ffffa0e60dc040e0 (&type->s_umount_key#47/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: alloc_super+0xb5/0x380 #1: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 779 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.10.0-rc6+ thesofproject#217 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014 Call Trace: dump_stack+0x8b/0xb0 check_noncircular+0xcf/0xf0 ? trace_call_bpf+0x139/0x260 __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 ? kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x2c4/0x2f0 ? btrfs_get_64+0x5e/0x100 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 ? __kmalloc_track_caller+0x2f2/0x320 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 ? capable+0x3a/0x60 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 This is straightforward to fix, simply release the path before we setup the balance_ctl. CC: [email protected] # 4.4+ Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: David Sterba <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
plbossart
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 29, 2022
…kprobe_event_gen_test_exit() When trace_get_event_file() failed, gen_kretprobe_test will be assigned as the error code. If module kprobe_event_gen_test is removed now, the null pointer dereference will happen in kprobe_event_gen_test_exit(). Check if gen_kprobe_test or gen_kretprobe_test is error code or NULL before dereference them. BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000012 PGD 0 P4D 0 Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI CPU: 3 PID: 2210 Comm: modprobe Not tainted 6.1.0-rc1-00171-g2159299a3b74-dirty #217 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.15.0-0-g2dd4b9b3f840-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:kprobe_event_gen_test_exit+0x1c/0xb5 [kprobe_event_gen_test] Code: Unable to access opcode bytes at 0xffffffff9ffffff2. RSP: 0018:ffffc900015bfeb8 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: ffffffffffffffea RBX: ffffffffa0002080 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: ffffffffa0001054 RSI: ffffffffa0001064 RDI: ffffffffdfc6349c RBP: ffffffffa0000000 R08: 0000000000000004 R09: 00000000001e95c0 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000000000800 R13: ffffffffa0002420 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 FS: 00007f56b75be540(0000) GS:ffff88813bc00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: ffffffff9ffffff2 CR3: 000000010874a006 CR4: 0000000000330ee0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: <TASK> __x64_sys_delete_module+0x206/0x380 ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0xd8/0x190 ? syscall_enter_from_user_mode+0x1c/0x50 do_syscall_64+0x3f/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ Fixes: 6483624 ("tracing: Add kprobe event command generation test module") Signed-off-by: Shang XiaoJing <[email protected]> Acked-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
there are duplicated defines HDA_DSP_ADSPIS_CL_DMA HDA_DSP_ADSPIC_CL_DMA
the defines HDA_SKL_ADSP_FW_STATUS and HDA_DSP_SRAM_REG_ROM_STATUS_SKL
are the same
Signed-off-by: Zhu Yingjiang [email protected]