Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1295578 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-12-20 13:30 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-12-21 23:50 +0100 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
firmware_class warnings on resume Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2015-12-20 13:30 +0100
Re: firmware_class warnings on resume Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com> - 2015-12-21 19:00 +0100
Re: firmware_class warnings on resume Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2015-12-21 23:50 +0100
| From | Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-20 13:30 +0100 |
| Subject | firmware_class warnings on resume |
| Message-ID | <qHLhD-vI-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
I hit this warning fairly frequently when resuming 4.4-rc5:
ret = usermodehelper_read_trylock();
if (WARN_ON(ret)) {
dev_err(device, "firmware: %s will not be loaded\n",
name);
goto out;
}
It seems like it could be improved in two ways fairly easily:
1. Shouldn't firmware_class try the direct load before trying to get
the usermodehelper lock?
2. Why is the !NOWAIT case doing a trylock? That seems wrong.
--Andy
--
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-21 19:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qIcUy-17Y-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1295578 |
On 12/20/2015 04:20 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I hit this warning fairly frequently when resuming 4.4-rc5:
>
> ret = usermodehelper_read_trylock();
> if (WARN_ON(ret)) {
> dev_err(device, "firmware: %s will not be loaded\n",
> name);
> goto out;
> }
>
> It seems like it could be improved in two ways fairly easily:
>
> 1. Shouldn't firmware_class try the direct load before trying to get
> the usermodehelper lock?
>
> 2. Why is the !NOWAIT case doing a trylock? That seems wrong.
>
> --Andy
>
I saw the same warning coming from the bluetooth stack, see the thread
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1950940 and
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1940130.
At least in the bluetooth case, the conclusion was the firmware request
should not be happening at that point in time and the reset_resume function
should be implemented instead. I put that work aside and haven't picked
it up again.
Thanks,
Laura
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-12-21 23:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qIhrc-43h-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1296124 |
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 12/20/2015 04:20 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> I hit this warning fairly frequently when resuming 4.4-rc5:
>>
>> ret = usermodehelper_read_trylock();
>> if (WARN_ON(ret)) {
>> dev_err(device, "firmware: %s will not be loaded\n",
>> name);
>> goto out;
>> }
>>
>> It seems like it could be improved in two ways fairly easily:
>>
>> 1. Shouldn't firmware_class try the direct load before trying to get
>> the usermodehelper lock?
>>
>> 2. Why is the !NOWAIT case doing a trylock? That seems wrong.
>>
>> --Andy
>>
>
> I saw the same warning coming from the bluetooth stack, see the thread
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1950940 and
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1940130.
> At least in the bluetooth case, the conclusion was the firmware request
> should not be happening at that point in time and the reset_resume function
> should be implemented instead. I put that work aside and haven't picked
> it up again.
That's exactly the issue I'm seeing, and I think you're right.
Still, I think the firmware_class code is wrong, too. If it wants to
warn, it should warn that firmware was requested too early in resume.
Using trylock as an excuse to fail a firmware load seems completely
bogus to me.
>
> Thanks,
> Laura
--
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web