From: James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>, Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>
Cc: coresight@lists.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Yabin Cui <yabinc@google.com>,
Keita Morisaki <keyz@google.com>,
Yuanfang Zhang <quic_yuanfang@quicinc.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Tamas Petz <tamas.petz@arm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Mike Leach <mike.leach@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 16/20] coresight: Add PM callbacks for sink device
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2026 15:30:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ffe95710-cd52-484e-821e-a3d92ba17c33@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f20b5a00-1d68-48d6-90c8-97dca2e279a4@arm.com>
On 09/04/2026 2:14 pm, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 09/04/2026 11:52, James Clark wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 05/04/2026 4:02 pm, Leo Yan wrote:
>>> Unlike system level sinks, per-CPU sinks may lose power during CPU idle
>>> states. Currently, this applies specifically to TRBE. This commit
>>> invokes save and restore callbacks for the sink in the CPU PM notifier.
>>>
>>> If the sink provides PM callbacks but the source does not, this is
>>> unsafe because the sink cannot be disabled safely unless the source
>>> can also be controlled, so veto low power entry to avoid lockups.
>>>
>>> Tested-by: James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-core.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++
>>> + ++++++++--
>>> 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-core.c b/drivers/
>>> hwtracing/coresight/coresight-core.c
>>> index
>>> c1e8debc76aba7eb5ecf7efe2a3b9b8b3e11b10c..a918bf6398a932de30fe9b4947020cc4c1cfb2f7 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-core.c
>>> @@ -1736,14 +1736,15 @@ static void coresight_release_device_list(void)
>>> /* Return: 1 if PM is required, 0 if skip, <0 on error */
>>> static int coresight_pm_check(struct coresight_path *path)
>>> {
>>> - struct coresight_device *source;
>>> - bool source_has_cb;
>>> + struct coresight_device *source, *sink;
>>> + bool source_has_cb, sink_has_cb;
>>> if (!path)
>>> return 0;
>>> source = coresight_get_source(path);
>>> - if (!source)
>>> + sink = coresight_get_sink(path);
>>> + if (!source || !sink)
>>> return 0;
>>> /* Don't save and restore if the source is inactive */
>>> @@ -1759,16 +1760,36 @@ static int coresight_pm_check(struct
>>> coresight_path *path)
>>> if (source_has_cb)
>>> return 1;
>>> + sink_has_cb = coresight_ops(sink)->pm_save_disable &&
>>> + coresight_ops(sink)->pm_restore_enable;
>>> + /*
>>> + * It is not permitted that the source has no callbacks while
>>> the sink
>>> + * does, as the sink cannot be disabled without disabling the
>>> source,
>>> + * which may lead to lockups. Alternatively, the ETM driver should
>>> + * enable self-hosted PM mode at probe (see etm4_probe()).
>>> + */
>>> + if (sink_has_cb) {
>>> + pr_warn_once("coresight PM failed: source has no PM
>>> callbacks; "
>>> + "cannot safely control sink\n");
>>
>> This prints out on my Orion board on a fresh boot because of how
>> pm_save_enable is setup there. Do we really need the configuration of
>> pm_save_enable for ETE/TRBE if we know that it always needs saving?
>>
>> It also stops warning if I rmmod and modprobe the module after
>> booting. Seems like pm_save_enable is different depending on how the
>> module is loaded which doesn't seem right.
>
> Thats because the warning is pr_warn_*once*()
>
> Suzuki
>
>
I don't think so, I tested it with a printf instead of a warn once and
also tested modprobeing straight after a reboot.
>>
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>> static int coresight_pm_device_save(struct coresight_device *csdev)
>>> {
>>> + if (!csdev || !coresight_ops(csdev)->pm_save_disable)
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> return coresight_ops(csdev)->pm_save_disable(csdev);
>>> }
>>> static void coresight_pm_device_restore(struct coresight_device
>>> *csdev)
>>> {
>>> + if (!csdev || !coresight_ops(csdev)->pm_restore_enable)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> coresight_ops(csdev)->pm_restore_enable(csdev);
>>> }
>>> @@ -1787,15 +1808,32 @@ static int coresight_pm_save(struct
>>> coresight_path *path)
>>> to = list_prev_entry(coresight_path_last_node(path), link);
>>> coresight_disable_path_from_to(path, from, to);
>>> + ret = coresight_pm_device_save(coresight_get_sink(path));
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + goto sink_failed;
>>> +
>>
>> The comment directly above this says "Up to the node before sink to
>> avoid latency". But then this line goes and saves the sink anyway. So
>> I'm not sure what's meant by the comment?
>>
>>> return 0;
>>> +
>>> +sink_failed:
>>> + if (!coresight_enable_path_from_to(path,
>>> coresight_get_mode(source),
>>> + from, to))
>>> + coresight_pm_device_restore(source);
>>> +
>>> + pr_err("Failed in coresight PM save on CPU%d: %d\n",
>>> + smp_processor_id(), ret);
>>> + this_cpu_write(percpu_pm_failed, true);
>>
>> Why does only a failing sink set percpu_pm_failed when failing to save
>> the source exits early. Sashiko has a similar comment that this could
>> result in restoring uninitialised source save data later, but a
>> comment in this function about why the flow is like this would be
>> helpful.
>>
>> We have coresight_disable_path_from_to() which always succeeds and
>> doesn't return an error. TRBE is the only sink with a pm_save_disable()
>> callback, but it always succeeds anyway.
>>
>> Would it not be much simpler to require that sink save/restore
>> callbacks always succeed and don't return anything? Seems like this
>> percpu_pm_failed stuff is extra complexity for a scenario that doesn't
>> exist? The only thing that can fail is saving the source but it
>> doesn't goto sink_failed when that happens.
>>
>> Ideally etm4_cpu_save() wouldn't have a return value either. It would
>> be good if we could find away to skip or ignore the timeouts in there
>> somehow because that's the only reason it can fail.
>>
>>> + return ret;
>>> }
>>> static void coresight_pm_restore(struct coresight_path *path)
>>> {
>>> struct coresight_device *source = coresight_get_source(path);
>>> + struct coresight_device *sink = coresight_get_sink(path);
>>> struct coresight_node *from, *to;
>>> int ret;
>>> + coresight_pm_device_restore(sink);
>>> +
>>> from = coresight_path_first_node(path);
>>> /* Up to the node before sink to avoid latency */
>>> to = list_prev_entry(coresight_path_last_node(path), link);
>>> @@ -1808,6 +1846,8 @@ static void coresight_pm_restore(struct
>>> coresight_path *path)
>>> return;
>>> path_failed:
>>> + coresight_pm_device_save(sink);
>>> +
>>> pr_err("Failed in coresight PM restore on CPU%d: %d\n",
>>> smp_processor_id(), ret);
>>>
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-09 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-05 15:02 [PATCH v10 00/20] CoreSight: Refactor power management for CoreSight path Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 01/20] coresight: Extract device init into coresight_init_device() Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 02/20] coresight: Populate CPU ID into coresight_device Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 03/20] coresight: Remove .cpu_id() callback from source ops Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 04/20] coresight: Take hotplug lock in enable_source_store() for Sysfs mode Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 05/20] coresight: etm4x: Set per-CPU path on local CPU Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 06/20] coresight: etm3x: " Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 07/20] coresight: Register CPU PM notifier in core layer Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 08/20] coresight: etm4x: Hook CPU PM callbacks Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 09/20] coresight: etm4x: Remove redundant checks in PM save and restore Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 10/20] coresight: syscfg: Use IRQ-safe spinlock to protect active variables Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 11/20] coresight: Move source helper disabling to coresight_disable_path() Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 12/20] coresight: Control path with range Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 13/20] coresight: Use helpers to fetch first and last nodes Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 14/20] coresight: Introduce coresight_enable_source() helper Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 15/20] coresight: Control path during CPU idle Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 16/20] coresight: Add PM callbacks for sink device Leo Yan
2026-04-09 10:52 ` James Clark
2026-04-09 12:54 ` James Clark
2026-04-09 13:14 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2026-04-09 14:30 ` James Clark [this message]
2026-04-09 14:31 ` James Clark
2026-04-09 14:49 ` Leo Yan
2026-04-09 15:44 ` Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 17/20] coresight: trbe: Save and restore state across CPU low power state Leo Yan
2026-04-09 10:52 ` James Clark
2026-04-09 15:54 ` Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 18/20] coresight: sysfs: Increment refcount only for system tracers Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 19/20] coresight: Move CPU hotplug callbacks to core layer Leo Yan
2026-04-05 15:02 ` [PATCH v10 20/20] coresight: sysfs: Validate CPU online status for per-CPU sources Leo Yan
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=ffe95710-cd52-484e-821e-a3d92ba17c33@linaro.org \
--to=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=coresight@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=keyz@google.com \
--cc=leo.yan@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mike.leach@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=quic_yuanfang@quicinc.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tamas.petz@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yabinc@google.com \
--cc=yeoreum.yun@arm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox