All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: jeffy <jeffy.chen@rock-chips.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
	Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, shawn.lin@rock-chips.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dianders@chromium.org,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, bhelgaas@google.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: rockchip: Add support for pcie wake irq
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2017 04:05:01 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5997486D.4040803@rock-chips.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170818181416.GF6008@atomide.com>

Hi guys,

On 08/19/2017 02:14 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> static irqreturn_t handle_threaded_wake_irq(int irq, void *_wirq)
>> >{
>> >         struct wake_irq *wirq = _wirq;
>> >         int res;
>> >
>> >         /* Maybe abort suspend? */
>> >         if (irqd_is_wakeup_set(irq_get_irq_data(irq))) {
>> >                 pm_wakeup_event(wirq->dev, 0);
>> >
>> >                 return IRQ_HANDLED; <--- We can return here, with the trigger still asserted
>> >         }
>> >...
>> >
>> >This could cause some kind of an IRQ storm, including a lockup or
>> >significant slowdown, I think.
> Hmm yeah that should be checked. The test cases I have are all
> edge interrupts where there is no status whatsoever after the
> wake-up event except which irq fired.
>
> To me it seems that the wakeirq consumer driver should be able
> to clear the level wakeirq in it's runtime_resume, or even better,
> maybe all it takes is just let the consumer driver's irq handler
> clear the level wakeirq when it runs after runtime_resume.
>

i did some tests about it:
[   70.335883] device_wakeup_arm_wake_irqs <-- enable wake irq
[   70.335932] handle_threaded_wake_irq
...<--- a lot of wake irq handler log
[   70.335965] suspend_device_irq
[   70.335987] irq_pm_check_wakeup <--- wake and disable wake irq
...<--- no wake irq handler log
[   70.336173] resume_irqs <-- enable wake irq
[   70.336480] handle_threaded_wake_irq
...<--- a lot of wake irq handler log
[   70.336600] device_wakeup_disarm_wake_irqs < disable wake irq
...<--- no wake irq handler log


so it would indeed possible to get irq storm in 
device_wakeup_arm_wake_irqs to suspend_device_irq
and resume_irqs to device_wakeup_disarm_wake_irqs.


a simple workaround would be:
enable_irq_wake
suspend_device_irq
enable_irq
...irq fired, irq_pm_check_wakeup disabled irq
disable_irq
resume_irqs
disable_irq_wake




and i have a hacky patch for that, which works well:

+++ b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-rockchip.c
@@ -1308,6 +1308,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused 
rockchip_pcie_suspend_noirq(struct
device *dev)
         if (!IS_ERR(rockchip->vpcie0v9))
                 regulator_disable(rockchip->vpcie0v9);

+       dev_pm_enable_wake_irq(dev);
+
         return ret;
  }

@@ -1316,6 +1318,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused 
rockchip_pcie_resume_noirq(struct d
evice *dev)
         struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
         int err;

+       dev_pm_disable_wake_irq(dev);
+


@ -323,7 +324,7 @@ void dev_pm_arm_wake_irq(struct wake_irq *wirq)
                 return;

         if (device_may_wakeup(wirq->dev)) {
-               if (wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
+               if (0 && wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
                         enable_irq(wirq->irq);

                 enable_irq_wake(wirq->irq);
@@ -345,7 +346,7 @@ void dev_pm_disarm_wake_irq(struct wake_irq *wirq)
         if (device_may_wakeup(wirq->dev)) {
                 disable_irq_wake(wirq->irq);

-               if (wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
+               if (0 && wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
                         disable_irq_nosync(wirq->irq);
         }



which is basically move enable_irq and disable_irq to driver noirq 
stages, to avoid:
1/ not disabled by irq_pm_check_wakeup when it first fired
2/ re-enabled by resume_irq when it disabled by irq_pm_check_wakeup


with that hack, i no longer saw the irq storm, and the irq handler would 
never be called:

[    9.693385] device_wakeup_arm_wake_irqs
[    9.697130] suspend_device_irq
<--- suspend noirq, enable wake irq
[    9.716569] irq_pm_check_wakeup disable the wake irq
<--- resume noirq, disable wake irq
[    9.968115] resume_irqs <-- enable wake irq(not actually enable, 
since disabled twice)
[   10.193072] device_wakeup_disarm_wake_irqs








_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jeffy <jeffy.chen@rock-chips.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
	Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com,
	shawn.lin@rock-chips.com, dianders@chromium.org,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: rockchip: Add support for pcie wake irq
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2017 04:05:01 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5997486D.4040803@rock-chips.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170818181416.GF6008@atomide.com>

Hi guys,

On 08/19/2017 02:14 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> static irqreturn_t handle_threaded_wake_irq(int irq, void *_wirq)
>> >{
>> >         struct wake_irq *wirq = _wirq;
>> >         int res;
>> >
>> >         /* Maybe abort suspend? */
>> >         if (irqd_is_wakeup_set(irq_get_irq_data(irq))) {
>> >                 pm_wakeup_event(wirq->dev, 0);
>> >
>> >                 return IRQ_HANDLED; <--- We can return here, with the trigger still asserted
>> >         }
>> >...
>> >
>> >This could cause some kind of an IRQ storm, including a lockup or
>> >significant slowdown, I think.
> Hmm yeah that should be checked. The test cases I have are all
> edge interrupts where there is no status whatsoever after the
> wake-up event except which irq fired.
>
> To me it seems that the wakeirq consumer driver should be able
> to clear the level wakeirq in it's runtime_resume, or even better,
> maybe all it takes is just let the consumer driver's irq handler
> clear the level wakeirq when it runs after runtime_resume.
>

i did some tests about it:
[   70.335883] device_wakeup_arm_wake_irqs <-- enable wake irq
[   70.335932] handle_threaded_wake_irq
...<--- a lot of wake irq handler log
[   70.335965] suspend_device_irq
[   70.335987] irq_pm_check_wakeup <--- wake and disable wake irq
...<--- no wake irq handler log
[   70.336173] resume_irqs <-- enable wake irq
[   70.336480] handle_threaded_wake_irq
...<--- a lot of wake irq handler log
[   70.336600] device_wakeup_disarm_wake_irqs < disable wake irq
...<--- no wake irq handler log


so it would indeed possible to get irq storm in 
device_wakeup_arm_wake_irqs to suspend_device_irq
and resume_irqs to device_wakeup_disarm_wake_irqs.


a simple workaround would be:
enable_irq_wake
suspend_device_irq
enable_irq
...irq fired, irq_pm_check_wakeup disabled irq
disable_irq
resume_irqs
disable_irq_wake




and i have a hacky patch for that, which works well:

+++ b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-rockchip.c
@@ -1308,6 +1308,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused 
rockchip_pcie_suspend_noirq(struct
device *dev)
         if (!IS_ERR(rockchip->vpcie0v9))
                 regulator_disable(rockchip->vpcie0v9);

+       dev_pm_enable_wake_irq(dev);
+
         return ret;
  }

@@ -1316,6 +1318,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused 
rockchip_pcie_resume_noirq(struct d
evice *dev)
         struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
         int err;

+       dev_pm_disable_wake_irq(dev);
+


@ -323,7 +324,7 @@ void dev_pm_arm_wake_irq(struct wake_irq *wirq)
                 return;

         if (device_may_wakeup(wirq->dev)) {
-               if (wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
+               if (0 && wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
                         enable_irq(wirq->irq);

                 enable_irq_wake(wirq->irq);
@@ -345,7 +346,7 @@ void dev_pm_disarm_wake_irq(struct wake_irq *wirq)
         if (device_may_wakeup(wirq->dev)) {
                 disable_irq_wake(wirq->irq);

-               if (wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
+               if (0 && wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
                         disable_irq_nosync(wirq->irq);
         }



which is basically move enable_irq and disable_irq to driver noirq 
stages, to avoid:
1/ not disabled by irq_pm_check_wakeup when it first fired
2/ re-enabled by resume_irq when it disabled by irq_pm_check_wakeup


with that hack, i no longer saw the irq storm, and the irq handler would 
never be called:

[    9.693385] device_wakeup_arm_wake_irqs
[    9.697130] suspend_device_irq
<--- suspend noirq, enable wake irq
[    9.716569] irq_pm_check_wakeup disable the wake irq
<--- resume noirq, disable wake irq
[    9.968115] resume_irqs <-- enable wake irq(not actually enable, 
since disabled twice)
[   10.193072] device_wakeup_disarm_wake_irqs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jeffy.chen@rock-chips.com (jeffy)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: rockchip: Add support for pcie wake irq
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2017 04:05:01 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5997486D.4040803@rock-chips.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170818181416.GF6008@atomide.com>

Hi guys,

On 08/19/2017 02:14 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> static irqreturn_t handle_threaded_wake_irq(int irq, void *_wirq)
>> >{
>> >         struct wake_irq *wirq = _wirq;
>> >         int res;
>> >
>> >         /* Maybe abort suspend? */
>> >         if (irqd_is_wakeup_set(irq_get_irq_data(irq))) {
>> >                 pm_wakeup_event(wirq->dev, 0);
>> >
>> >                 return IRQ_HANDLED; <--- We can return here, with the trigger still asserted
>> >         }
>> >...
>> >
>> >This could cause some kind of an IRQ storm, including a lockup or
>> >significant slowdown, I think.
> Hmm yeah that should be checked. The test cases I have are all
> edge interrupts where there is no status whatsoever after the
> wake-up event except which irq fired.
>
> To me it seems that the wakeirq consumer driver should be able
> to clear the level wakeirq in it's runtime_resume, or even better,
> maybe all it takes is just let the consumer driver's irq handler
> clear the level wakeirq when it runs after runtime_resume.
>

i did some tests about it:
[   70.335883] device_wakeup_arm_wake_irqs <-- enable wake irq
[   70.335932] handle_threaded_wake_irq
...<--- a lot of wake irq handler log
[   70.335965] suspend_device_irq
[   70.335987] irq_pm_check_wakeup <--- wake and disable wake irq
...<--- no wake irq handler log
[   70.336173] resume_irqs <-- enable wake irq
[   70.336480] handle_threaded_wake_irq
...<--- a lot of wake irq handler log
[   70.336600] device_wakeup_disarm_wake_irqs < disable wake irq
...<--- no wake irq handler log


so it would indeed possible to get irq storm in 
device_wakeup_arm_wake_irqs to suspend_device_irq
and resume_irqs to device_wakeup_disarm_wake_irqs.


a simple workaround would be:
enable_irq_wake
suspend_device_irq
enable_irq
...irq fired, irq_pm_check_wakeup disabled irq
disable_irq
resume_irqs
disable_irq_wake




and i have a hacky patch for that, which works well:

+++ b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-rockchip.c
@@ -1308,6 +1308,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused 
rockchip_pcie_suspend_noirq(struct
device *dev)
         if (!IS_ERR(rockchip->vpcie0v9))
                 regulator_disable(rockchip->vpcie0v9);

+       dev_pm_enable_wake_irq(dev);
+
         return ret;
  }

@@ -1316,6 +1318,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused 
rockchip_pcie_resume_noirq(struct d
evice *dev)
         struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
         int err;

+       dev_pm_disable_wake_irq(dev);
+


@ -323,7 +324,7 @@ void dev_pm_arm_wake_irq(struct wake_irq *wirq)
                 return;

         if (device_may_wakeup(wirq->dev)) {
-               if (wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
+               if (0 && wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
                         enable_irq(wirq->irq);

                 enable_irq_wake(wirq->irq);
@@ -345,7 +346,7 @@ void dev_pm_disarm_wake_irq(struct wake_irq *wirq)
         if (device_may_wakeup(wirq->dev)) {
                 disable_irq_wake(wirq->irq);

-               if (wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
+               if (0 && wirq->status & WAKE_IRQ_DEDICATED_ALLOCATED)
                         disable_irq_nosync(wirq->irq);
         }



which is basically move enable_irq and disable_irq to driver noirq 
stages, to avoid:
1/ not disabled by irq_pm_check_wakeup when it first fired
2/ re-enabled by resume_irq when it disabled by irq_pm_check_wakeup


with that hack, i no longer saw the irq storm, and the irq handler would 
never be called:

[    9.693385] device_wakeup_arm_wake_irqs
[    9.697130] suspend_device_irq
<--- suspend noirq, enable wake irq
[    9.716569] irq_pm_check_wakeup disable the wake irq
<--- resume noirq, disable wake irq
[    9.968115] resume_irqs <-- enable wake irq(not actually enable, 
since disabled twice)
[   10.193072] device_wakeup_disarm_wake_irqs

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-18 20:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-17 12:04 [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] PCI: rockchip: Move PCIE_WAKE handling into rockchip pcie driver Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: rockchip: Add support for pcie wake irq Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04   ` Jeffy Chen
2017-08-18  7:23   ` Shawn Lin
2017-08-18  7:23     ` Shawn Lin
2017-08-18  7:23     ` Shawn Lin
2017-08-18  8:32     ` jeffy
2017-08-18  8:32       ` jeffy
2017-08-18  8:32       ` jeffy
2017-08-18 17:01   ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:01     ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:01     ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:07     ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:07       ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:07       ` Brian Norris
2017-08-18 17:47     ` jeffy
2017-08-18 17:47       ` jeffy
2017-08-18 17:47       ` jeffy
2017-08-18 18:28       ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:28         ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:28         ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:14     ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:14       ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 18:14       ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-18 20:05       ` jeffy [this message]
2017-08-18 20:05         ` jeffy
2017-08-18 20:05         ` jeffy
2017-08-22 17:26         ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-22 17:26           ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-22 17:26           ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-23  1:32           ` jeffy
2017-08-23  1:32             ` jeffy
2017-08-23  1:57             ` Brian Norris
2017-08-23  1:57               ` Brian Norris
2017-08-23  1:57               ` Brian Norris
2017-08-23  2:16               ` jeffy
2017-08-23  2:16                 ` jeffy
2017-08-23  2:16                 ` jeffy
2017-12-19  0:48             ` Brian Norris
2017-12-19  0:48               ` Brian Norris
2017-12-19  0:48               ` Brian Norris
2017-12-20 19:19               ` Tony Lindgren
2017-12-20 19:19                 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-12-22 23:20                 ` Brian Norris
2017-12-22 23:20                   ` Brian Norris
2017-12-22 23:20                   ` Brian Norris
2017-12-23 16:36                   ` Tony Lindgren
2017-12-23 16:36                     ` Tony Lindgren
2017-12-23 16:36                     ` Tony Lindgren
2017-08-17 12:04 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/3] dt-bindings: " Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04   ` Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: dts: rockchip: Handle pcie wake in pcie driver for Gru Jeffy Chen
2017-08-17 12:04   ` Jeffy Chen

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=5997486D.4040803@rock-chips.com \
    --to=jeffy.chen@rock-chips.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
    --cc=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=shawn.lin@rock-chips.com \
    --cc=tony@atomide.com \
    /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.