From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
peter.wang@mediatek.com, stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] PM: runtime: Fix supplier device management during consumer" failed to apply to 4.19-stable tree
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2022 10:22:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1657354962114216@kroah.com> (raw)
The patch below does not apply to the 4.19-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 887371066039011144b4a94af97d9328df6869a2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 21:16:41 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] PM: runtime: Fix supplier device management during consumer
probe
Because pm_runtime_get_suppliers() bumps up the rpm_active counter
of each device link to a supplier of the given device in addition
to bumping up the supplier's PM-runtime usage counter, a runtime
suspend of the consumer device may case the latter to go down to 0
when pm_runtime_put_suppliers() is running on a remote CPU. If that
happens after pm_runtime_put_suppliers() has released power.lock for
the consumer device, and a runtime resume of that device takes place
immediately after it, before pm_runtime_put() is called for the
supplier, that pm_runtime_put() call may cause the supplier to be
suspended even though the consumer is active.
To prevent that from happening, modify pm_runtime_get_suppliers() to
call pm_runtime_get_sync() for the given device's suppliers without
touching the rpm_active counters of the involved device links
Accordingly, modify pm_runtime_put_suppliers() to call pm_runtime_put()
for the given device's suppliers without looking at the rpm_active
counters of the device links at hand. [This is analogous to what
happened before commit 4c06c4e6cf63 ("driver core: Fix possible
supplier PM-usage counter imbalance").]
Since pm_runtime_get_suppliers() sets supplier_preactivated for each
device link where the supplier's PM-runtime usage counter has been
incremented and pm_runtime_put_suppliers() calls pm_runtime_put() for
the suppliers whose device links have supplier_preactivated set, the
PM-runtime usage counter is balanced for each supplier and this is
independent of the runtime suspend and resume of the consumer device.
However, in case a device link with DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME set is dropped
during the consumer device probe, so pm_runtime_get_suppliers() bumps
up the supplier's PM-runtime usage counter, but it cannot be dropped by
pm_runtime_put_suppliers(), make device_link_release_fn() take care of
that.
Fixes: 4c06c4e6cf63 ("driver core: Fix possible supplier PM-usage counter imbalance")
Reported-by: Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com>
Cc: 5.1+ <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 5.1+
diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c
index 58aa49527d3a..460d6f163e41 100644
--- a/drivers/base/core.c
+++ b/drivers/base/core.c
@@ -487,6 +487,16 @@ static void device_link_release_fn(struct work_struct *work)
device_link_synchronize_removal();
pm_runtime_release_supplier(link);
+ /*
+ * If supplier_preactivated is set, the link has been dropped between
+ * the pm_runtime_get_suppliers() and pm_runtime_put_suppliers() calls
+ * in __driver_probe_device(). In that case, drop the supplier's
+ * PM-runtime usage counter to remove the reference taken by
+ * pm_runtime_get_suppliers().
+ */
+ if (link->supplier_preactivated)
+ pm_runtime_put_noidle(link->supplier);
+
pm_request_idle(link->supplier);
put_device(link->consumer);
diff --git a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
index 23cc4c377d77..949907e2e242 100644
--- a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
+++ b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
@@ -1768,7 +1768,6 @@ void pm_runtime_get_suppliers(struct device *dev)
if (link->flags & DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME) {
link->supplier_preactivated = true;
pm_runtime_get_sync(link->supplier);
- refcount_inc(&link->rpm_active);
}
device_links_read_unlock(idx);
@@ -1788,19 +1787,8 @@ void pm_runtime_put_suppliers(struct device *dev)
list_for_each_entry_rcu(link, &dev->links.suppliers, c_node,
device_links_read_lock_held())
if (link->supplier_preactivated) {
- bool put;
-
link->supplier_preactivated = false;
-
- spin_lock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
-
- put = pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev) &&
- refcount_dec_not_one(&link->rpm_active);
-
- spin_unlock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
-
- if (put)
- pm_runtime_put(link->supplier);
+ pm_runtime_put(link->supplier);
}
device_links_read_unlock(idx);
reply other threads:[~2022-07-09 8:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=1657354962114216@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=peter.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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.