From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@st.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] cpuidle: psci: Fix error path via converting to a platform driver
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 15:42:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200626144218.GD27140@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200615152054.6819-3-ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 05:20:51PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> The current error paths for the cpuidle-psci driver, may leak memory or
> possibly leave CPU devices attached to their PM domains. These are quite
> harmless issues, but still deserves to be taken care of.
>
> Although, rather than fixing them by keeping track of allocations that
> needs to be freed, which tends to become a bit messy, let's convert into a
> platform driver. In this way, it gets easier to fix the memory leaks as we
> can rely on the devm_* functions.
>
> Moreover, converting to a platform driver also enables support for deferred
> probe, which subsequent changes takes benefit from.
>
Though I don't have strong opinion, I don't like platform device for cpuidle.
But that's not main issue. I am more worried about the need for whole
deferred probe for cpuidle. Is this due to OSI and Qcom dependencies ?
Ideally, the firmware is already to accept suspend calls soon after they
are powered on in psci f/w.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@st.com>,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] cpuidle: psci: Fix error path via converting to a platform driver
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 15:42:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200626144218.GD27140@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200615152054.6819-3-ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 05:20:51PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> The current error paths for the cpuidle-psci driver, may leak memory or
> possibly leave CPU devices attached to their PM domains. These are quite
> harmless issues, but still deserves to be taken care of.
>
> Although, rather than fixing them by keeping track of allocations that
> needs to be freed, which tends to become a bit messy, let's convert into a
> platform driver. In this way, it gets easier to fix the memory leaks as we
> can rely on the devm_* functions.
>
> Moreover, converting to a platform driver also enables support for deferred
> probe, which subsequent changes takes benefit from.
>
Though I don't have strong opinion, I don't like platform device for cpuidle.
But that's not main issue. I am more worried about the need for whole
deferred probe for cpuidle. Is this due to OSI and Qcom dependencies ?
Ideally, the firmware is already to accept suspend calls soon after they
are powered on in psci f/w.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-26 14:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-15 15:20 [PATCH 0/5] cpuidle: psci: Various improvements for PSCI PM domains Ulf Hansson
2020-06-15 15:20 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-15 15:20 ` [PATCH 1/5] cpuidle: psci: Fail cpuidle registration if set OSI mode failed Ulf Hansson
2020-06-15 15:20 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-18 18:01 ` Lina Iyer
2020-06-18 18:01 ` Lina Iyer
2020-06-26 14:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-06-26 14:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-06-26 14:47 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-06-26 14:47 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-06-15 15:20 ` [PATCH 2/5] cpuidle: psci: Fix error path via converting to a platform driver Ulf Hansson
2020-06-15 15:20 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-26 14:42 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2020-06-26 14:42 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-06-26 23:06 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-26 23:06 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-15 15:20 ` [PATCH 3/5] cpuidle: psci: Split into two separate build objects Ulf Hansson
2020-06-15 15:20 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-18 18:02 ` Lina Iyer
2020-06-18 18:02 ` Lina Iyer
2020-06-26 14:44 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-06-26 14:44 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-06-15 15:20 ` [PATCH 4/5] cpuidle: psci: Convert PM domain to platform driver Ulf Hansson
2020-06-15 15:20 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-23 17:21 ` Lina Iyer
2020-06-23 17:21 ` Lina Iyer
2020-06-15 15:20 ` [PATCH 5/5] cpuidle: psci: Prevent domain idlestates until consumers are ready Ulf Hansson
2020-06-15 15:20 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-15 18:05 ` Saravana Kannan
2020-06-15 18:05 ` Saravana Kannan
2020-06-16 6:49 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-16 6:49 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-16 7:05 ` Saravana Kannan
2020-06-16 7:05 ` Saravana Kannan
2020-06-24 9:57 ` [PATCH 0/5] cpuidle: psci: Various improvements for PSCI PM domains Ulf Hansson
2020-06-24 9:57 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-06-30 10:23 ` Lukasz Luba
2020-06-30 10:23 ` Lukasz Luba
2020-07-07 11:53 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-07-07 11:53 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-07-07 12:37 ` Lukasz Luba
2020-07-07 12:37 ` Lukasz Luba
2020-07-07 12:51 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-07-07 12:51 ` Ulf Hansson
2020-07-07 13:26 ` Lukasz Luba
2020-07-07 13:26 ` Lukasz Luba
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=20200626144218.GD27140@bogus \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=benjamin.gaignard@st.com \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=ilina@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=saravanak@google.com \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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.