From: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: "Shilimkar, Santosh" <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>,
linux-omap <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>,
Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@ti.com>,
Franky Lin <frankyl@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio/omap: fix invalid context restore of gpio bank-0
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 13:22:45 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FF1E6F5.9080402@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120701084540.GK4202@atomide.com>
On 07/01/2012 03:45 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Shilimkar, Santosh <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> [120629 21:23]:
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:52 PM, Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com> wrote:
>>> Currently the gpio _runtime_resume/suspend functions are calling the
>>> get_context_loss_count() platform function if the function is populated for
>>> a gpio bank. This function is used to determine if the gpio bank logic state
>>> needs to be restored due to a power transition. This function will be populated
>>> for all banks, but it should only be called for banks that have the
>>> "loses_context" variable set. It is pointless to call this if loses_context is
>>> false as we know the context will never be lost and will not need restoring.
>>>
>>> For all OMAP2+ devices gpio bank-0 is in an always-on power domain and so will
>>> never lose context. We found that the get_context_loss_count() was being called
>>> for bank-0 during the probe and returning 1 instead of 0 indicating that the
>>> context had been lost. This was causing the context restore function to be
>>> called at probe time for this bank and because the context had never been saved,
>>> was restoring an invalid state. This ultimately resulted in a crash [1].
>>>
>>> There are multiple bugs here that need to be addressed ...
>>>
>>> 1. Why the always-on power domain returns a context loss count of 1? This needs
>>> to be fixed in the power domain code. However, the gpio driver should not
>>> assume the loss count is 0 to begin with.
>> Indeed. GPIO driver should not assume the value.
>>
>>> 2. The omap gpio driver should never be calling get_context_loss_count for a
>>> gpio bank in a always-on domain. This is pointless and adds unneccessary
>>> overhead.
>> Make sense too.
>>
>>> 3. The OMAP gpio driver assumes that the initial power domain context loss count
>>> will be 0 at the time the gpio driver is probed. However, it could be
>>> possible that this is not the case and an invalid context restore could be
>>> performed during the probe. To avoid this otherwise only populated the
>>> get_context_loss_count() function pointer after the initial call to
>>> pm_runtime_get() has occurred. This will ensure that the first
>>> pm_runtime_put() initialised the loss count correctly.
>>>
>>> This patch addresses issues 2 and 3 above.
>
> Should this one be Cc: stable? If this is a regression, then the regression
> causing commit should be mentioned.
So that raises a good point. Looking at the stable branch (3.4.4) it is
missing 3 other fixes too [1][2][3]. So this particular problem would
not have been exposed, however, I am wondering if there are other
problems lingering there.
This is a regression is exposed by [2]. I should add that to the changelog.
Cheers
Jon
[1]
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=b3c64bc30af67ed328a8d919e41160942b870451
[2]
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=1b1287032df3a69d3ef9a486b444f4ffcca50d01
[3]
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=22770de11cb13e7120f973bca6c800de371a6717
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-02 18:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-29 17:22 [PATCH] gpio/omap: fix invalid context restore of gpio bank-0 Jon Hunter
2012-06-29 20:27 ` Franky Lin
2012-06-30 4:18 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
2012-07-01 8:45 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-07-02 18:22 ` Jon Hunter [this message]
2012-07-02 18:07 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-07-02 18:26 ` Jon Hunter
2012-07-02 23:34 ` NeilBrown
2012-07-03 0:05 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-07-03 0:20 ` Jon Hunter
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=4FF1E6F5.9080402@ti.com \
--to=jon-hunter@ti.com \
--cc=frankyl@broadcom.com \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@stericsson.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
--cc=tarun.kanti@ti.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).