Chrome platform driver development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
To: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@denx.de>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
	Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>,
	Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>,
	Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/12] reboot: reboot, not shutdown, on hw_protection_reboot timeout
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 13:28:12 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7b6d3226-4422-415a-9146-16c421463ac5@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250113-hw_protection-reboot-v2-2-161d3fc734f0@pengutronix.de>

On 13/01/2025 18:25, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> hw_protection_shutdown() will kick off an orderly shutdown and if that
> takes longer than a configurable amount of time, an emergency shutdown
> will occur.
> 
> Recently, hw_protection_reboot() was added for those systems that don't
> implement a proper shutdown and are better served by rebooting and
> having the boot firmware worry about doing something about the critical
> condition.
> 
> On timeout of the orderly reboot of hw_protection_reboot(), the system
> would go into shutdown, instead of reboot. This is not a good idea, as
> going into shutdown was explicitly not asked for.
> 
> Fix this by always doing an emergency reboot if hw_protection_reboot()
> is called and the orderly reboot takes too long.
> 
> Fixes: 79fa723ba84c ("reboot: Introduce thermal_zone_device_critical_reboot()")
> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
> ---
>   kernel/reboot.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>   1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/reboot.c b/kernel/reboot.c
> index 847ac5d17a659981c6765699eac323f5e87f48c1..222b63dfd31020d0e2bc1b1402dbfa82adc71990 100644
> --- a/kernel/reboot.c
> +++ b/kernel/reboot.c
> @@ -932,48 +932,76 @@ void orderly_reboot(void)
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(orderly_reboot);
>   
> +static const char *hw_protection_action_str(enum hw_protection_action action)
> +{
> +	switch (action) {
> +	case HWPROT_ACT_SHUTDOWN:
> +		return "shutdown";
> +	case HWPROT_ACT_REBOOT:
> +		return "reboot";
> +	default:
> +		return "undefined";
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +static enum hw_protection_action hw_failure_emergency_action;

nit: Do we have a (theoretical) possibility that two emergency restarts 
get scheduled with different actions? Should the action be allocated 
(maybe not) for each caller, or should there be a check if an operation 
with conflicting action is already scheduled?

If this was already considered and thought it is not an issue:

Reviewed-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>


Yours,
	-- Matti

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-01-22 11:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-01-13 16:25 [PATCH v2 00/12] reboot: support runtime configuration of emergency hw_protection action Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] reboot: replace __hw_protection_shutdown bool action parameter with an enum Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:10   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-21  9:27     ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] reboot: reboot, not shutdown, on hw_protection_reboot timeout Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:10   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-22 11:28   ` Matti Vaittinen [this message]
2025-02-17 20:22     ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-02-18  6:45       ` Matti Vaittinen
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] docs: thermal: sync hardware protection doc with code Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:11   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-21  9:29     ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-22 11:01   ` Matti Vaittinen
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] reboot: describe do_kernel_restart's cmd argument in kernel-doc Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:11   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] reboot: rename now misleading __hw_protection_shutdown symbols Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:11   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] reboot: indicate whether it is a HARDWARE PROTECTION reboot or shutdown Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:11   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] reboot: add support for configuring emergency hardware protection action Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:12   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-21  9:35     ` Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] regulator: allow user configuration of " Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:12   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-22 11:18   ` Matti Vaittinen
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] platform/chrome: cros_ec_lpc: prepare for hw_protection_shutdown removal Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:12   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] dt-bindings: thermal: give OS some leeway in absence of critical-action Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] thermal: core: allow user configuration of hardware protection action Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:12   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-13 16:25 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] reboot: retire hw_protection_reboot and hw_protection_shutdown helpers Ahmad Fatoum
2025-01-20  7:13   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-01-14  0:33 ` [PATCH v2 00/12] reboot: support runtime configuration of emergency hw_protection action Andrew Morton

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=7b6d3226-4422-415a-9146-16c421463ac5@gmail.com \
    --to=mazziesaccount@gmail.com \
    --cc=a.fatoum@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bleung@chromium.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=festevam@denx.de \
    --cc=groeck@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=tzungbi@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox