alarmtimer: implement minimum alarm interval for allowing suspend

alarmtimer suspend return -EBUSY if the next alarm will fire in less
than 2 seconds.  This allows one RTC seconds tick to occur subsequent
to this check before the alarm wakeup time is set, ensuring the wakeup
time is still in the future (assuming the RTC does not tick one more
second prior to setting the alarm).  If suspend is rejected, hold a
wakeup source for 2 seconds to process the alarm prior to reattempting
suspend.

Signed-off-by: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
alarmtimer: Use hrtimer per-alarm instead of per-base

Arve Hjønnevåg reported numerous crashes from the
"BUG_ON(timer->state != HRTIMER_STATE_CALLBACK)" check
in __run_hrtimer after it called alarmtimer_fired.

It ends up the alarmtimer code was not properly handling
possible failures of hrtimer_try_to_cancel, and because
these faulres occur when the underlying base hrtimer is
being run, this limits the ability to properly handle
modifications to any alarmtimers on that base.

Because much of the logic duplicates the hrtimer logic,
it seems that we might as well have a per-alarmtimer
hrtimer, and avoid the extra complextity of trying to
multiplex many alarmtimers off of one hrtimer.

Thus this patch moves the hrtimer to the alarm structure
and simplifies the management logic.

Cc: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@android.com>
Cc: Colin Cross <ccross@google.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reported-by: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@android.com>
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
scsi: disable module compiling

Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
init: Move stack canary initialization after setup_arch

Stack canary intialization involves getting a random number.
Getting this random number may involve accessing caches or other
architectural specific features which are not available until
after the architecture is setup. Move the stack canary initialization
later to accomodate this.

Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <lauraa@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
ext4: prevent kernel panic in case of uninitialized jinode

ext4: prevent kernel panic in case of uninitialized jinode

In some cases the kernel crash occurs during system suspend/resume:

[ 4095.041351] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000
[ 4095.050689] pgd = c0004000
[ 4095.053985] [00000000] *pgd=00000000
[ 4095.058807] Internal error: Oops: 5 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
[ 4095.064483] Modules linked in: wl12xx mac80211 pvrsrvkm_sgx540_120 cfg80211 compat [last unloaded: wl12xx_sdio]
[ 4095.064575] CPU: 1    Tainted: G    B        (3.0.31-01807-gfac16a0 #1)
[ 4095.064605] PC is at jbd2_journal_file_inode+0x38/0x118
[ 4095.064666] LR is at mpage_da_map_and_submit+0x48c/0x618
[ 4095.064697] pc : [<c01da5a8>]    lr : [<c01aeac0>]    psr: 60000013
[ 4095.064697] sp : c6e07c80  ip : c6e07ca0  fp : c6e07c9c
[ 4095.064727] r10: 00000001  r9 : c6e06000  r8 : 00000179
[ 4095.064758] r7 : c6e07ca0  r6 : c73b8400  r5 : 00000000  r4 : c59a7d80
[ 4095.064758] r3 : 00000038  r2 : 00000800  r1 : 00000000  r0 : c7754fc0
[ 4095.064788] Flags: nZCv  IRQs on  FIQs on  Mode SVC_32  ISA ARM  Segment kernel
[ 4095.064819] Control: 10c5387d  Table: 86cc804a  DAC: 00000015
[ 4095.064849]
[ 4095.064849] PC: 0xc01da528:
[ 4095.064880] a528  0a000003 e3a05000 e1a00005 e24bd020 e89da9f0 e5951010 e3e06000 e14b22dc
.....
[ 4095.070373] 7fe0: c00a48ac 00000013 00000000 c6e07ff8 c00a48ac c00c0a94 84752f09 60772177
[ 4095.070404] Backtrace:
[ 4095.070465] [<c01da570>] (jbd2_journal_file_inode+0x0/0x118) from [<c01aeac0>] (mpage_da_map_and_submit+0x48c/0x618)
[ 4095.070495]  r7:c6e07ca0 r6:c6e07d00 r5:c6e07d90 r4:c7754fc0
[ 4095.070556] [<c01ae634>] (mpage_da_map_and_submit+0x0/0x618) from [<c01af40c>] (ext4_da_writepages+0x2a4/0x5c8)
[ 4095.070617] [<c01af168>] (ext4_da_writepages+0x0/0x5c8) from [<c0112af4>] (do_writepages+0x34/0x40)
[ 4095.070678] [<c0112ac0>] (do_writepages+0x0/0x40) from [<c01645a4>] (writeback_single_inode+0xd4/0x288)
[ 4095.070709] [<c01644d0>] (writeback_single_inode+0x0/0x288) from [<c0164ed4>] (writeback_sb_inodes+0xb4/0x184)
[ 4095.070770] [<c0164e20>] (writeback_sb_inodes+0x0/0x184) from [<c01655a0>] (writeback_inodes_wb+0xc4/0x13c)
[ 4095.070831] [<c01654dc>] (writeback_inodes_wb+0x0/0x13c) from [<c01658f0>] (wb_writeback+0x2d8/0x464)
[ 4095.070861] [<c0165618>] (wb_writeback+0x0/0x464) from [<c0165cb8>] (wb_do_writeback+0x23c/0x2c4)
[ 4095.070922] [<c0165a7c>] (wb_do_writeback+0x0/0x2c4) from [<c0165df4>] (bdi_writeback_thread+0xb4/0x2dc)
[ 4095.070953] [<c0165d40>] (bdi_writeback_thread+0x0/0x2dc) from [<c00c0b18>] (kthread+0x90/0x98)
[ 4095.071014] [<c00c0a88>] (kthread+0x0/0x98) from [<c00a48ac>] (do_exit+0x0/0x72c)
[ 4095.071044]  r7:00000013 r6:c00a48ac r5:c00c0a88 r4:c78c7ec4
[ 4095.071105] Code: e89da8f0 e5963000 e3130002 1afffffa (e5913000)
[ 4095.071166] ---[ end trace 7fe9f9b727e5cf78 ]---
[ 4095.071197] Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception

The probably reason of such behaviour is an inode opened in READ mode
has been marked as 'dirty' somehow and written back by ext4_da_writepages.
Cause jinode == NULL it could lead to the kernel panic.

The patch prevents kernel panic and helps to investigate the problem
providing an inode number.

Change-Id: I1d77a011b580db682b8e2d122ef3d5e44e0ce5c7
Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Mieshkov <volodymyr.mieshkov@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem-spinlock: Implement writer lock-stealing for better scalability

We (Linux Kernel Performance project) found a regression
introduced by commit:

  5a505085f043 mm/rmap: Convert the struct anon_vma::mutex to an rwsem

which converted all anon_vma::mutex locks rwsem write locks.

The semantics are the same, but the behavioral difference is
quite huge in some cases. After investigating it we found the
root cause: mutexes support lock stealing while rwsems don't.

Here is the link for the detailed regression report:

  https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/29/84

Ingo suggested adding write lock stealing to rwsems:

    "I think we should allow lock-steal between rwsem writers - that
     will not hurt fairness as most rwsem fairness concerns relate to
     reader vs. writer fairness"

And here is the rwsem-spinlock version.

With this patch, we got a double performance increase in one
test box with following aim7 workfile:

    FILESIZE: 1M
    POOLSIZE: 10M
    10 fork_test

 /usr/bin/time output w/o patch                       /usr/bin/time_output with patch
 -- Percent of CPU this job got: 369%                 Percent of CPU this job got: 537%
 Voluntary context switches: 640595016                Voluntary context switches: 157915561

We got a 45% increase in CPU usage and saved about 3/4 voluntary context switches.

Reported-by: LKP project <lkp@linux.intel.com>
Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: paul.gortmaker@windriver.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: Implement writer lock-stealing for better scalability

Commit 5a505085f043 ("mm/rmap: Convert the struct anon_vma::mutex
to an rwsem") changed struct anon_vma::mutex to an rwsem, which
caused aim7 fork_test performance to drop by 50%.

Yuanhan Liu did the following excellent analysis:

    https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/29/84

and found that the regression is caused by strict, serialized,
FIFO sequential write-ownership of rwsems. Ingo suggested
implementing opportunistic lock-stealing for the front writer
task in the waitqueue.

Yuanhan Liu implemented lock-stealing for spinlock-rwsems,
which indeed recovered much of the regression - confirming
the analysis that the main factor in the regression was the
FIFO writer-fairness of rwsems.

In this patch we allow lock-stealing to happen when the first
waiter is also writer. With that change in place the
aim7 fork_test performance is fully recovered on my
Intel NHM EP, NHM EX, SNB EP 2S and 4S test-machines.

Reported-by: lkp@linux.intel.com
Reported-by: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: paul.gortmaker@windriver.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
net: wireless: bcmdhd: support Hotspot 2.0 release 1.0

Signed-off-by: Ecco Park <eccopark@broadcom.com>
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Shmidt <dimitrysh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: make the waiter type an enumeration rather than a bitmask

We are not planning to add some new waiter flags, so we can convert the
waiter type into an enumeration.

Background: David Howells suggested I do this back when I tried adding
a new waiter type for unfair readers. However, I believe the cleanup
applies regardless of that use case.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: shorter spinlocked section in rwsem_down_failed_common()

This change reduces the size of the spinlocked and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE
sections in rwsem_down_failed_common():

- We only need the sem->wait_lock to insert ourselves on the wait_list;
  the waiter node can be prepared outside of the wait_lock.

- The task state only needs to be set to TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE immediately
  before checking if we actually need to sleep; it doesn't need to protect
  the entire function.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: move rwsem_down_failed_common code into rwsem_down_{read,write}_failed

Remove the rwsem_down_failed_common function and replace it with two
identical copies of its code in rwsem_down_{read,write}_failed.
This is because we want to make different optimizations in
rwsem_down_{read,write}_failed; we are adding this pure-duplication
step as a separate commit in order to make it easier to check the
following steps.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: simplify rwsem_down_read_failed

When trying to acquire a read lock, the RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS adjustment
doesn't cause other readers to block, so we never have to worry about waking
them back after canceling this adjustment in rwsem_down_read_failed().

We also never want to steal the lock in rwsem_down_read_failed(), so we
don't have to grab the wait_lock either.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: simplify rwsem_down_write_failed

When waking writers, we never grant them the lock - instead, they have
to acquire it themselves when they run, and remove themselves from the
wait_list when they succeed.

As a result, we can do a few simplifications in rwsem_down_write_failed():

- We don't need to check for !waiter.task since __rwsem_do_wake() doesn't
  remove writers from the wait_list

- There is no point releaseing the wait_lock before entering the wait loop,
  as we will need to reacquire it immediately. We can change the loop so
  that the lock is always held at the start of each loop iteration.

- We don't need to get a reference on the task structure, since the task
  is responsible for removing itself from the wait_list. There is no risk,
  like in the rwsem_down_read_failed() case, that a task would wake up and
  exit (thus destroying its task structure) while __rwsem_do_wake() is
  still running - wait_lock protects against that.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: more agressive lock stealing in rwsem_down_write_failed

Some small code simplifications can be achieved by doing more agressive
lock stealing:

- When rwsem_down_write_failed() notices that there are no active locks
  (and thus no thread to wake us if we decided to sleep), it used to wake
  the first queued process. However, stealing the lock is also sufficient
  to deal with this case, so we don't need this check anymore.

- In try_get_writer_sem(), we can steal the lock even when the first waiter
  is a reader. This is correct because the code path that wakes readers is
  protected by the wait_lock. As to the performance effects of this change,
  they are expected to be minimal: readers are still granted the lock
  (rather than having to acquire it themselves) when they reach the front
  of the wait queue, so we have essentially the same behavior as in
  rwsem-spinlock.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: use cmpxchg for trying to steal write lock

Using rwsem_atomic_update to try stealing the write lock forced us to
undo the adjustment in the failure path. We can have simpler and faster
code by using cmpxchg instead.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: avoid taking wait_lock in rwsem_down_write_failed

In rwsem_down_write_failed(), if there are active locks after we wake up
(i.e. the lock got stolen from us), skip taking the wait_lock and go back
to sleep immediately.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: skip initial trylock in rwsem_down_write_failed

We can skip the initial trylock in rwsem_down_write_failed() if there are
known active lockers already, thus saving one likely-to-fail cmpxchg.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: simplify __rwsem_do_wake

This is mostly for cleanup value:

- We don't need several gotos to handle the case where the first
  waiter is a writer. Two simple tests will do (and generate very
  similar code).

- In the remainder of the function, we know the first waiter is a reader,
  so we don't have to double check that. We can use do..while loops
  to iterate over the readers to wake (generates slightly better code).

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: implement support for write lock stealing on the fastpath

When we decide to wake up readers, we must first grant them as many
read locks as necessary, and then actually wake up all these readers.
But in order to know how many read shares to grant, we must first
count the readers at the head of the queue. This might take a while
if there are many readers, and we want to be protected against a
writer stealing the lock while we're counting. To that end, we grant
the first reader lock before counting how many more readers are queued.

We also require some adjustments to the wake_type semantics.

RWSEM_WAKE_NO_ACTIVE used to mean that we had found the count to
be RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS, in which case the rwsem was known to be free
as nobody could steal it while we hold the wait_lock. This doesn't
make sense once we implement fastpath write lock stealing, so we now
use RWSEM_WAKE_ANY in that case.

Similarly, when rwsem_down_write_failed found that a read lock was active,
it would use RWSEM_WAKE_READ_OWNED which signalled that new readers could
be woken without checking first that the rwsem was available. We can't do
that anymore since the existing readers might release their read locks,
and a writer could steal the lock before we wake up additional readers.
So, we have to use a new RWSEM_WAKE_READERS value to indicate we only want
to wake readers, but we don't currently hold any read lock.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
rwsem: do not block readers at head of queue if other readers are active

This change fixes a race condition where a reader might determine it
needs to block, but by the time it acquires the wait_lock the rwsem
has active readers and no queued waiters.

In this situation the reader can just in parallel with the existing active
readers; it does not need to block until the active readers complete.

Thanks to Peter Hurley for noticing this possible race.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>