All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] PCI: revert preparing for wakeup in runtime-suspend finalization
Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2013 14:14:46 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <510E3896.9060401@openvz.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5674023.p1MahTPJ11@vostro.rjw.lan>

Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, February 02, 2013 09:58:45 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Saturday, February 02, 2013 04:12:03 PM Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>>> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 12:55:15 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:04:57 AM Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>>>>>> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, January 28, 2013 04:17:42 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>>>>>> [+cc Rafael]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Konstantin Khlebnikov
>>>>>>>> <khlebnikov@openvz.org>    wrote:
>>>>>>>>> This patch effectively reverts commit 42eca2302146fed51335b95128e949ee6f54478f
>>>>>>>>> ("PCI: Don't touch card regs after runtime suspend D3")
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> | This patch checks whether the pci state is saved and doesn't attempt to hit
>>>>>>>>> | any registers after that point if it is.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This seems completely wrong. Yes, PCI configuration space has been saved by
>>>>>>>>> driver, but this doesn't means that all job is done and device has been
>>>>>>>>> suspended and ready for waking up in the future.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For example driver e1000e for ethernet in my thinkpad x220 saves pci-state
>>>>>>>>> but device cannot wakeup after that, because it needs some ACPI callbacks
>>>>>>>>> which usually called from pci_finish_runtime_suspend().
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> | Optimus (dual-gpu) laptops seem to have their own form of D3cold, but
>>>>>>>>> | unfortunately enter it on normal D3 transitions via the ACPI callback.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hardware which disappears from the bus unexpectedly is exception, so let's
>>>>>>>>> handle it as an exception. Its driver should set device state to D3cold and
>>>>>>>>> the rest code will handle it properly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Functions in D3cold don't have power, so it's completely expected that
>>>>>>>> they would disappear from the bus and not respond to config accesses.
>>>>>>>> Maybe Dave was referring to D3hot, where functions *should* respond to
>>>>>>>> config accesses.  I dunno.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just to be clear, it sounds like 42eca230 caused a regression on your
>>>>>>>> e1000e device?  If so, I guess we should revert it unless you and Dave
>>>>>>>> can figure out a better patch that fixes both your e1000e device and
>>>>>>>> the Optimus issue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, if there's a regression, let's revert it, but I'd like the regression
>>>>>>> to be described clearly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yep, this is regression.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> commit 42eca2302146fed51335b95128e949ee6f54478f ("PCI: Don't touch
>>>>>> card regs after runtime suspend D3") changes state convention during
>>>>>> runtime-suspend transaction too much. If PCI configuration space
>>>>>> has been saved by driver that does not means that all job is done
>>>>>> and device has been suspended and ready for waking up in the future.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> e1000e saves pci-config space itself, but it requires operations which
>>>>>> pci_finish_runtime_suspend() does: preparing for wake (calling particular
>>>>>> platform pm-callbacks) and switching to proper sleep state.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, I'd argue this is a bug in e1000e.  Why does it need to save the PCI
>>>>> config space even though pci_pm_runtime_suspend() will do that anyway?
>>>>
>>>> I honestly don't think we should revert 42eca2302146 because of this.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, there is a requirement that drivers not save the PCI config space by
>>>> themselves unless they want to do the whole power management by themselves too
>>>> and e1000e is not following that.  So either we need to drop the
>>>> pci_save_state() from __e1000_shutdown() which I would prefer (I'm not really
>>>> sure why it is there), or e1000_runtime_suspend() needs to call
>>>> pci_finish_runtime_suspend() by itself.
>>>
>>> Yet another problem: some drivers calls pci_save_state() from ->probe() callback
>>> to use this saved state in pci_error_handlers->slot_reset().
>>> As result pdev->state_saved is true mostly all time.
>>> At least e1000e and drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv_pci.c are doing this.
>>>
>>> I think it will be safer to revert 42eca2302146 in v3.8
>>
>> Well, I wonder if we can just do something like the appended patch instead and
>> address the e1000e runtime suspend by calling pci_finish_runtime_suspend()
>> directly from e1000_runtime_suspend().
>>
>> While we can revert commit 42eca2302146, that hardly would be progress,
>> because then the issue it was supposed to address would still need to be
>> addressed somehow.
>>
>> ---
>>   drivers/pci/pci-driver.c |    4 ++++
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
>> +++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
>> @@ -628,6 +628,7 @@ static int pci_pm_suspend(struct device
>>   		goto Fixup;
>>   	}
>>
>> +	pci_dev->state_saved = false;
>>   	if (pm->suspend) {
>>   		pci_power_t prev = pci_dev->current_state;
>>   		int error;
>> @@ -774,6 +775,7 @@ static int pci_pm_freeze(struct device *
>>   		return 0;
>>   	}
>>
>> +	pci_dev->state_saved = false;
>>   	if (pm->freeze) {
>>   		int error;
>>
>> @@ -862,6 +864,7 @@ static int pci_pm_poweroff(struct device
>>   		goto Fixup;
>>   	}
>>
>> +	pci_dev->state_saved = false;
>>   	if (pm->poweroff) {
>>   		int error;
>>
>> @@ -987,6 +990,7 @@ static int pci_pm_runtime_suspend(struct
>>   	if (!pm || !pm->runtime_suspend)
>>   		return -ENOSYS;
>>
>> +	pci_dev->state_saved = false;
>>   	pci_dev->no_d3cold = false;
>>   	error = pm->runtime_suspend(dev);
>>   	suspend_report_result(pm->runtime_suspend, error);
>
> For completness, on top of the above one.

I would prefer to remove pci_save_state() from e1000e_runtime_suspend().

--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
@@ -5429,9 +5429,11 @@ static int __e1000_shutdown(struct pci_dev *pdev, bool *enable_wake,
         }
         e1000e_reset_interrupt_capability(adapter);

-       retval = pci_save_state(pdev);
-       if (retval)
-               return retval;
+       if (!runtime) {
+               retval = pci_save_state(pdev);
+               if (retval)
+                       return retval;
+       }

         status = er32(STATUS);
         if (status & E1000_STATUS_LU)

I found another problem in e1000e: it does not calls pci_enable_master()
in 'resume' functions, but it disables 'bus-mastering' on suspending.
Thus if pci_save_state() is called after clearing that bit whole device
wouldn't work after resuming.

--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
@@ -5598,6 +5598,7 @@ static int __e1000_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)

         pci_set_power_state(pdev, PCI_D0);
         pci_restore_state(pdev);
+       pci_set_master(pdev);
         pci_save_state(pdev);

         err = pci_enable_device_mem(pdev);

>
> ---
>   drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c |    1 +
>   drivers/pci/pci.c                          |    1 +
>   drivers/pci/pci.h                          |    1 -
>   include/linux/pci.h                        |    1 +
>   4 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/pci.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.c
> @@ -1840,6 +1840,7 @@ int pci_finish_runtime_suspend(struct pc
>
>   	return error;
>   }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_finish_runtime_suspend);
>
>   /**
>    * pci_dev_run_wake - Check if device can generate run-time wake-up events.
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/pci.h
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.h
> @@ -64,7 +64,6 @@ extern int pci_set_platform_pm(struct pc
>   extern void pci_update_current_state(struct pci_dev *dev, pci_power_t state);
>   extern void pci_power_up(struct pci_dev *dev);
>   extern void pci_disable_enabled_device(struct pci_dev *dev);
> -extern int pci_finish_runtime_suspend(struct pci_dev *dev);
>   extern int __pci_pme_wakeup(struct pci_dev *dev, void *ign);
>   extern void pci_wakeup_bus(struct pci_bus *bus);
>   extern void pci_config_pm_runtime_get(struct pci_dev *dev);
> Index: linux-pm/include/linux/pci.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ linux-pm/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -936,6 +936,7 @@ int pci_back_from_sleep(struct pci_dev *
>   bool pci_dev_run_wake(struct pci_dev *dev);
>   bool pci_check_pme_status(struct pci_dev *dev);
>   void pci_pme_wakeup_bus(struct pci_bus *bus);
> +int pci_finish_runtime_suspend(struct pci_dev *dev);
>
>   static inline int pci_enable_wake(struct pci_dev *dev, pci_power_t state,
>   				  bool enable)
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> @@ -5696,6 +5696,7 @@ static int e1000_runtime_suspend(struct
>   		bool wake;
>
>   		__e1000_shutdown(pdev,&wake, true);
> +		pci_finish_runtime_suspend(pdev);
>   	}
>
>   	return 0;
>
>
>


  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-03 10:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-01-18 11:42 [PATCH 0/5] pci/e1000e: return runtime-pm back to work Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-01-18 11:42 ` [PATCH 1/5] e1000e: fix resuming from runtime-suspend Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-01-28 23:05   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-01-29  1:11     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-29  6:32       ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-01-29 12:00         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-31  1:18         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-31  7:05           ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-01-31  1:23   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-18 11:42 ` [PATCH 2/5] e1000e: fix pci device enable counter balance Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-01-28 23:09   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-01-29  0:31     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-01-29  6:45       ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-01-31  1:07     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-18 11:42 ` [PATCH 3/5] PCI: revert preparing for wakeup in runtime-suspend finalization Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-01-28 23:17   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-01-29  1:15     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-29  7:04       ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-01-29 11:55         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-31  1:13           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-02 12:12             ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-02-02 20:58               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-02 22:59                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-03 10:14                   ` Konstantin Khlebnikov [this message]
2013-02-03 12:57                     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-03 23:03               ` David Airlie
2013-02-03 23:19               ` David Airlie
2013-02-03 23:31                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-18 11:42 ` [PATCH 4/5] PCI: don't touch enable_cnt in pci_device_shutdown() Konstantin Khlebnikov
2013-01-18 16:16   ` Don Dutile
2013-01-28 23:40   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-01-28 23:44     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-01-29  2:47       ` Khalid Aziz
2013-01-18 11:42 ` [PATCH 5/5] PCI: catch enable-counter underflows Konstantin Khlebnikov

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=510E3896.9060401@openvz.org \
    --to=khlebnikov@openvz.org \
    --cc=airlied@redhat.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    /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.