From: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
To: zhanglong <longzhax@intel.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
"linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drivers-core: move the calling to device_pm_remove behind the calling to bus_remove_device
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 09:01:27 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1350867687.2207.11.camel@ymzhang.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <507D7D08.7010903@intel.com>
On Tue, 2012-10-16 at 23:28 +0800, zhanglong wrote:
> We hit an hang issue when removing a mmc device on Medfield Android phone by sysfs interface.
>
> device_pm_remove will call pm_runtime_remove which would disable
> runtime PM of the device. After that pm_runtime_get* or
> pm_runtime_put* will be ignored. So if we disable the runtime PM
> before device really be removed, drivers' _remove callback may
> access HW even pm_runtime_get* fails. That is bad.
>
> Consider below call sequence when removing a device:
> device_del => device_pm_remove
> => class_intf->remove_dev(dev, class_intf) => pm_runtime_get_sync/put_sync
> => bus_remove_device => device_release_driver => pm_runtime_get_sync/put_sync
>
> remove_dev might call pm_runtime_get_sync/put_sync.
> Then, generic device_release_driver also calls pm_runtime_get_sync/put_sync.
> Since device_del => device_pm_remove firstly, later _get_sync wouldn't really wake up the device.
>
> I git log -p to find the patch which moves the calling to device_pm_remove ahead.
> It's below patch:
>
> commit 775b64d2b6ca37697de925f70799c710aab5849a
> Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> Date: Sat Jan 12 20:40:46 2008 +0100
>
> PM: Acquire device locks on suspend
>
> This patch reorganizes the way suspend and resume notifications are
> sent to drivers. The major changes are that now the PM core acquires
> every device semaphore before calling the methods, and calls to
> device_add() during suspends will fail, while calls to device_del()
> during suspends will block.
>
> It also provides a way to safely remove a suspended device with the
> help of the PM core, by using the device_pm_schedule_removal() callback
> introduced specifically for this purpose, and updates two drivers (msr
> and cpuid) that need to use it.
>
>
> As device_pm_schedule_removal is deleted by another patch, we need also revert other parts of the patch,
> i.e. move the calling of device_pm_remove after the calling to bus_remove_device.
>
> Signed-off-by: LongX Zhang <longx.zhang@intel.com>
Rafael,
With the patch V2, is there anything else we could improve before it can
be merged into your testing tree?
Thanks,
Yanmin
> ---
> drivers/base/core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c
> index abea76c..150a415 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/core.c
> @@ -1180,7 +1180,6 @@ void device_del(struct device *dev)
> if (dev->bus)
> blocking_notifier_call_chain(&dev->bus->p->bus_notifier,
> BUS_NOTIFY_DEL_DEVICE, dev);
> - device_pm_remove(dev);
> dpm_sysfs_remove(dev);
> if (parent)
> klist_del(&dev->p->knode_parent);
> @@ -1205,6 +1204,7 @@ void device_del(struct device *dev)
> device_remove_file(dev, &uevent_attr);
> device_remove_attrs(dev);
> bus_remove_device(dev);
> + device_pm_remove(dev);
> driver_deferred_probe_del(dev);
>
> /* Notify the platform of the removal, in case they
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-22 1:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-16 15:28 [PATCH v2] drivers-core: move the calling to device_pm_remove behind the calling to bus_remove_device zhanglong
2012-10-22 1:01 ` Yanmin Zhang [this message]
2012-10-24 19:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-10-24 22:13 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2012-10-24 22:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-10-25 0:20 ` Yanmin Zhang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1350867687.2207.11.camel@ymzhang.sh.intel.com \
--to=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=longzhax@intel.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.