> -----原始邮件-----
&gt; 发件人: "Sven Peter" <s...@kernel.org>
&gt; 发送时间: 2025-06-05 22:02:35 (星期四)
&gt; 收件人: chenglingfei <chenglingfei...@ict.ac.cn>
&gt; 抄送: j...@jannau.net, aly...@rosenzweig.io, n...@gompa.dev, 
zhangzhenwei...@ict.ac.cn, wangzh...@ict.ac.cn, ma...@linux.ibm.com, 
m...@ellerman.id.au, npig...@gmail.com, christophe.le...@csgroup.eu, 
nav...@kernel.org, andi.sh...@kernel.org, as...@lists.linux.dev, 
linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, 
linux-...@vger.kernel.org, linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
&gt; 主题: Re: [BUG] rmmod i2c-pasemi-platform causing kernel crash on Apple M1.
&gt; 
&gt; Hi,
&gt; 
&gt; On 05.06.25 13:55, chenglingfei wrote:
&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; &gt; -----原始邮件-----
&gt; &gt; &gt; 发件人: "Sven Peter" <s...@kernel.org>
&gt; &gt; &gt; 发送时间: 2025-06-05 18:25:09 (星期四)
&gt; &gt; &gt; 收件人: 程凌飞 <chenglingfei...@ict.ac.cn>, j...@jannau.net, 
aly...@rosenzweig.io, n...@gompa.dev
&gt; &gt; &gt; 抄送: zhangzhenwei...@ict.ac.cn, wangzh...@ict.ac.cn, 
ma...@linux.ibm.com, m...@ellerman.id.au, npig...@gmail.com, 
christophe.le...@csgroup.eu, nav...@kernel.org, andi.sh...@kernel.org, 
as...@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org, 
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-...@vger.kernel.org, 
linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
&gt; &gt; &gt; 主题: Re: [BUG] rmmod i2c-pasemi-platform causing kernel crash on 
Apple M1.
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; Hi,
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; On 05.06.25 05:02, 程凌飞 wrote:
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Hi, all!
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; We’ve encountered a kernel crash when running rmmod 
i2c-pasemi-platform on a Mac Mini M1 (T8103) running Asahi Arch Linux.
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; The bug was first found on the Linux v6.6, which is built 
manually with the Asahi given config to run our services.
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; At that time, the i2c-pasemi-platform was i2c-apple.
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; We noticed in the Linux v6.7, the pasemi is splitted into 
two separate modules, one of which is i2c-pasemi-platform.
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Therefore, we built Linux v6.14.6 and tried to rmmod 
i2c-pasemi-platform again, the crash still exists. Moreover, we fetched
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; the latest i2c-pasemi-platform on 
linux-next(911483b25612c8bc32a706ba940738cc43299496) and asahi, built them and
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; tested again with Linux v6.14.6, but the crash remains.
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Because kexec is not supported and will never be fully 
supported on Apple Silicon platforms due to hardware and firmware
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; design constraints, we can not record the panic logs 
through kdump.
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; Do you have UART connected to a device under test which you 
could use to
&gt; &gt; &gt; grab the panic log from the kernel? Alternatively you can also 
run the
&gt; &gt; &gt; kernel under m1n1's hypervisor and grab the log that way. It'll 
emulate
&gt; &gt; &gt; the serial port and redirect its output via USB.
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; I don't have UART, but I have tried to run the kernel under m1n1's 
hypervisor. However, it does not trigger the release of cs42l83.
&gt; &gt; Given that m1n1 provides full peripheral device emulation capability, 
the most plausible explanation would be an incorrect
&gt; &gt; firmware loading sequence. But the documentation of Asahi provides 
little details about how to generate an initramfs with
&gt; &gt; firmware (I think), can you give more guidance about it?
&gt; 
&gt; I'm not sure why you are even trying to create a special initramfs. Just
&gt; load your usual kernel using the usual boot flow as a guest. There's 
&gt; also no firmware involved in i2c and I'm not sure what you mean with 
&gt; "full peripheral device emulation" either or how that's related to 
firmware.
&gt; You also mention that the crash happens when you run rmmod so I again 
&gt; don't understand what "it does not trigger the release of cs42l83" means 
&gt; here.
&gt; 

Well, simply running rmmod i2c-pasemi-platform doesn't directly cause a crash. 
The crash occurs when the module removal triggers device_remove for cs42l83, 
which ultimately calls pasemi_smb_waitready in i2c-pasemi-platform. You may 
refer
to the brief analysis provided in my first email for more details.

When booting the kernel without m1n1, cs42l83 is automatically probed after 
i2c-pasemi-platform loads and subsequently removed when executing rmmod 
i2c-pasemi-platform, resulting in a kernel crash. However, when booting under 
m1n1,
cs42l83 isn't probed or removed -- the device appears to be non-existent. This 
observation led me to mention "full peripheral device emulation."

Furthermore, since cs42l83 remains untouched under m1n1, the chain of 
operations 
involving device_remove and the subsequent call to pasemi_smb_waitready never 
occurs.
This inherently prevents the crash scenario, which explains why I'm unable to 
reproduce
the crash when running under m1n1.

I can try again by 'loading your usual kernel using the usual boot flow as a 
guest,',
but I don't think it'll make much difference.

&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; Thus we tried to find the root cause of the issue manually. 
When we perform rmmod, the kernel performs device releasing on
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; the i2c bus, then calls the remove function in 
snd-soc-cs42l83-i2c, which calls the cs42l42_common_remove in cs42l42,
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; because cs42l42-&gt;init_done is true, it performs 
regmap_write, and finally calls into pasemi_smb_waitready in i2c-pasemi
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; -core.c. We noticed that smbus-&gt;use_irq is true, and 
after it calls into wait_for_completion_timeout, the system crashs!&gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; We found that wait_for_completion_timeout is one of the 
core scheduler APIs used by tens of thousands of other drivers,
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; it is unlikely causing the crash. So we tried to remove the 
call to wait_for_completion_timeout, then the system seems to
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; run well.
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; However, because we have little knowledge about i2c devices 
and specifications, we are not sure whether this change will
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; cause other potential harms for the system and device. Is 
this call to wait necesary here? Or can you give a more
&gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; sophisticated fix?
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; Yes, that call is necessary. It waits for the "transfer 
completed"
&gt; &gt; &gt; interrupt from the hardware. Without it the driver will try to 
read data
&gt; &gt; &gt; before it's available and you'll see corruption. I'm surprised 
hardware
&gt; &gt; &gt; attached to i2c (usb pd controller and audio I think) works at 
all with
&gt; &gt; &gt; that change.
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; &gt; Sven
&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; Are there any methods or tools to systematically verify its 
functionality? I am not sure whether the devices attached to i2c
&gt; &gt; should work well even after the i2c-pasemi-platform has been removed.
&gt; 
&gt; I don't understand. You say you saw a crash inside pasemi_smb_waitready 
&gt; when calling wait_for_completion_timeout and decided to remove that 
&gt; method. When you remove the call you break the entire driver because it 
&gt; will now try to read data long before the i2c transaction has been 
&gt; completed.
&gt; Obviously, no i2c device will work when the driver isn't loaded but 
&gt; without waiting for the completion they also won't work when the driver 
&gt; is loaded.
&gt; 
&gt; 
&gt; Sven


</chenglingfei...@ict.ac.cn></s...@kernel.org></chenglingfei...@ict.ac.cn></s...@kernel.org>

Reply via email to