Re: [PATCH] OMAP: PM: DMA: Enable runtime pm

Kevin Hilman
2011-01-24T21:43:36Z

"G, Manjunath Kondaiah" <manjugk@ti.com> writes:

> From: Manjunath G Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com>
>
> Enable runtime pm and use pm_runtime_get_sync and pm_runtime_put
> for OMAP DMA driver.
>
> Since DMA driver callback will happen from interrupt context and
> DMA client driver will release all DMA resources from interrupt
> context itself, pm_runtime_put_sync() cannot be used in DMA driver.
> Instead, pm_runtime_put() is used which is asynchronous call and
> gets executed in work queue.

It's fine that the asynchronous version of put is uses (it's actually
preferred.) However, the description is confusing here. You talk about
driver callbacks here but in the patch, your calling _put() from
omap_dma_free(), not from the callback.

You're also calling _get() from the request. That means, as long as the
DMA channel is allocated, it will be active.

Wouldn't it be better to do the 'get' when the channel is started and
the 'put' when the callback has finished, possibly using the
'autosuspend' feature with a timeout so that back-to-back DMA transfers
will not have have additional latency between transfers?

> Boot tested on OMAP4 blaze and all applicable tests are executed
> along with dma hwmod series.

Any OMAP2 or OMAP3 testing?

> Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@ti.com>
> ---
> Discussion and alignment for using runtime API's in DMA can be accessed at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg37819.html
> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg38355.html
> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg38391.html
> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg38400.html
>
> arch/arm/plat-omap/dma.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
> 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/dma.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/dma.c
> index c4b2b47..48ee292 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/dma.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/dma.c
> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@
> #include <linux/io.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>
> #include <asm/system.h>
> #include <mach/hardware.h>
> @@ -58,6 +59,7 @@ enum { DMA_CHAIN_STARTED, DMA_CHAIN_NOTSTARTED };
> #define OMAP_FUNC_MUX_ARM_BASE (0xfffe1000 + 0xec)
>
> static struct omap_system_dma_plat_info *p;
> +static struct platform_device *pd;
> static struct omap_dma_dev_attr *d;
>
> static int enable_1510_mode;
> @@ -676,6 +678,7 @@ int omap_request_dma(int dev_id, const char *dev_name,
> unsigned long flags;
> struct omap_dma_lch *chan;
>
> + pm_runtime_get_sync(&pd->dev);
> spin_lock_irqsave(&dma_chan_lock, flags);
> for (ch = 0; ch < dma_chan_count; ch++) {
> if (free_ch == -1 && dma_chan[ch].dev_id == -1) {
> @@ -686,6 +689,7 @@ int omap_request_dma(int dev_id, const char *dev_name,
> }
> if (free_ch == -1) {
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dma_chan_lock, flags);
> + pm_runtime_put(&pd->dev);
> return -EBUSY;
> }
> chan = dma_chan + free_ch;
> @@ -779,7 +783,7 @@ void omap_free_dma(int lch)
> p->dma_write(0, CCR, lch);
> omap_clear_dma(lch);
> }
> -
> + pm_runtime_put(&pd->dev);
> spin_lock_irqsave(&dma_chan_lock, flags);
> dma_chan[lch].dev_id = -1;
> dma_chan[lch].next_lch = -1;
> @@ -1979,6 +1983,7 @@ static int __devinit omap_system_dma_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> + pd = pdev;

minor: platform_device pointers are more commonly named pdev

> d = p->dma_attr;
> errata = p->errata;
>
> @@ -2000,6 +2005,9 @@ static int __devinit omap_system_dma_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> }
> }
>
> + pm_runtime_enable(&pd->dev);
> + pm_runtime_get_sync(&pd->dev);
> +
> spin_lock_init(&dma_chan_lock);
> for (ch = 0; ch < dma_chan_count; ch++) {
> omap_clear_dma(ch);
> @@ -2065,6 +2073,14 @@ static int __devinit omap_system_dma_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> dma_chan[1].dev_id = 1;
> }
> p->show_dma_caps();
> +
> + /*
> + * Note: If dma channels are reserved through boot paramters,
> + * then dma device is always enabled.
> + */
> + if (!omap_dma_reserve_channels)
> + pm_runtime_put(&pd->dev);
> +

Readability would be improved if there was an unconditional
pm_runtime_put() at the end of this function preceeded by an extra
pm_runtime_get() (async version) if reserve_channels has been used.

Kevin

> return 0;
>