linux-pm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX] PM: Fix active child counting when disabled and forbidden
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 10:36:44 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1352428604.7176.103.camel@yhuang-dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1211081125470.1280-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>

On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 12:07 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > > > > is it a good idea to allow to set device state to SUSPENDED if the device
> > > > > is disabled?
> > > > 
> > > > No, it is not.  The status should always be ACTIVE as long as usage_count > 0.
> 
> That isn't strictly true, because pm_runtime_get_noresume violates this
> rule.  What the PM core actually does is prevent a transition from the
> ACTIVE state to the SUSPENDING/SUSPENDED state if usage_count > 0,
> _provided_ runtime PM is enabled.  There's no such restriction when it
> is disabled.

Usage count may be not a issue for the end user.  But "on" in "control"
sysfs file + SUSPENDED can be confusing for the end user.  Maybe we need
to check dev->power.runtime_auto in pm_runtime_set_suspended().

> BTW, do we need to think about what happens in the case where the
> device _does_ have a driver and for some reason the driver has disabled
> the device for runtime PM?  I would just as soon ignore the issue.
> 
> > > > However, in some cases we actually would like to change the status to
> > > > SUSPENDED when usage_count becomes equal to 0, because that means we can
> > > > suspend (I mean really suspend) the parents of the devices in question
> > > > (and we want to notify the parents in those cases).
> > > 
> > > So do you think Alan Stern's suggestion about forbidden and disabled is
> > > the right way to go?
> > 
> > I'm not really sure about that.
> > 
> > My original idea was that the runtime PM status and usage counter would
> > only matter when runtime PM of a device was enabled.  That leads to
> > problems, though, when we enable runtime PM of a device whose usage
> > counter is greater from zero and status is SUSPENDED.
> 
> That doesn't seem to be a problem.  It can arise without disabling
> runtime PM at all -- just call pm_runtime_get_noresume.

I think pm_runtime_get_noresume can not fix the issue.
pm_runtiem_set_active() should be invoked before pm_runtime_enable() if
necessary.  That is, the invoker should be responsible for the
consistence between usage_count and SUSPENDED/ACTIVE status.  And the
API may be a little low level and error-prone to the invoker (mainly bus
code).

Best Regards,
Huang Ying

> >  Also when the
> > device's status is ACTIVE, but its parent's child count is 0.
> 
> __pm_runtime_set_status prevents this situation from arising.  When the 
> device's status is set to ACTIVE, the parent's child count is 
> incremented.  So this isn't a problem either.
> 
> > It's not very easy to fix this at the core level, though, because we
> > depend on the current behavior in some places.  I'm thinking that
> > perhaps pm_runtime_enable() should just WARN() if things are obviously
> > inconsistent (although there still may be problems, for example, if the
> > parent's child count is 2 when we enable runtime PM for its child, but that
> > child is the only one it actually has).
> 
> I think we should continue the original strategy of ignoring the status
> and usage counter when runtime PM is disabled.  This is definitely the
> easiest and most straightforward approach.  Fixing the problem at hand
> (VGA controllers) by changing the PCI subsystem seems like the simplest
> solution.
> 
> Your revised patch does do the job, except for a few problems.  
> Namely, while local_pci_probe() and pci_device_remove() are running,
> the device _does_ have a driver.  This means that local_pci_probe()
> should not call pm_runtime_get_sync(), for example.  Doing so would
> invoke the driver's runtime_resume routine before calling the driver's
> probe routine!
> 
> The USB subsystem solves this problem by carefully keeping track of the 
> state of the device-driver binding:
> 
> 	Originally the device is UNBOUND.
> 
> 	At the start of the subsystem's probe routine, the state
> 	changes to BINDING.
> 
> 	If the probe succeeds then it changes to BOUND; otherwise
> 	it goes back to UNBOUND.
> 
> 	At the start of the subsystem's remove routine, the state
> 	changes to UNBINDING.  At the end it goes to UNBOUND.
> 
> When the state is anything other than BOUND, the subsystem's runtime PM 
> routines act as though there is no driver.  This works because the 
> subsystem makes sure that the device is ACTIVE with a nonzero usage 
> count before calling the driver's probe or remove routine, so no 
> runtime PM callbacks can occur at these awkward times.
> 
> If PCI adopted this strategy then your new patch would work okay.  I 
> think -- I haven't checked it thoroughly.
> 
> Alan Stern
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2012-11-09  2:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-05  1:17 [BUGFIX] PM: Fix active child counting when disabled and forbidden Huang Ying
2012-11-05  1:56 ` Alan Stern
2012-11-06  0:43   ` Huang Ying
2012-11-06 15:17     ` Alan Stern
2012-11-07  0:26       ` Huang Ying
2012-11-07 15:49         ` Alan Stern
2012-11-07 16:09           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-07 17:17             ` Alan Stern
2012-11-07 20:21               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-07 20:47                 ` Alan Stern
2012-11-07 21:44                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-07 21:56                     ` Alan Stern
2012-11-07 22:51                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-07 23:09                         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-08  1:15                           ` Huang Ying
2012-11-08  1:35                             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-08  2:04                               ` Huang Ying
2012-11-08  9:56                                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-08 17:07                                   ` Alan Stern
2012-11-09  2:36                                     ` Huang Ying [this message]
2012-11-09 16:41                                       ` Alan Stern
2012-11-12  0:37                                         ` Huang Ying
2012-11-12  2:36                                           ` Alan Stern
2012-11-12  5:55                                             ` Huang Ying
2012-11-12 16:32                                               ` Alan Stern
2012-11-13  1:19                                                 ` Huang Ying
2012-11-13  2:32                                                   ` Alan Stern
2012-11-13  5:12                                                     ` Huang Ying
2012-11-13 16:10                                                       ` Alan Stern
2012-11-14  1:08                                                         ` Huang Ying
2012-11-14  9:52                                                           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-14 13:35                                                             ` Huang Ying
2012-11-14 16:06                                                               ` Alan Stern
2012-11-13 23:43                                                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-14 10:05                                     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-14 16:42                                       ` Alan Stern
2012-11-14 19:42                                         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-14 21:45                                           ` Alan Stern
2012-11-14 23:10                                             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-15  1:03                                               ` Huang Ying
2012-11-15  9:51                                                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-15 10:09                                                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-15 15:27                                                     ` Alan Stern
2012-11-16  0:36                                                   ` Huang Ying
2012-11-16  0:44                                                     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-16  0:48                                                       ` Huang Ying
2012-11-16  0:55                                                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-16  0:54                                                         ` Huang Ying
2012-11-16  1:29                                                           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-16  1:27                                                             ` Huang Ying
2012-11-16 10:10                                                               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2012-11-16  3:11                                                   ` Huang Ying

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=1352428604.7176.103.camel@yhuang-dev \
    --to=ying.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    /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).