linux-pm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: qiaozhou <qiaozhou@asrmicro.com>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Wang Wilbur <wilburwang@asrmicro.com>,
	Wu Gang <gangwu@asrmicro.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Question] about patch: don't use [delayed_]work_pending()
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:45:03 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160901184503.GD12660@htj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d2501c4c-8e7b-bea3-1b01-000b36b5dfe9@asrmicro.com>

Hello,

On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 05:09:36PM +0800, qiaozhou wrote:
> In our system, we do cpu clock init in of_clk_init path, and use pm qos to
> maintain cpu/cci clock. Firstly we init a CCI_CLK_QOS and set a default
> value, then update CCI_CLK_QOS to limit CCI min frequency according to
> current cpu frequency. Before calling pm_qos_update_request, irq is
> disabled, but after the calling, irq is enabled in cancel_delayed_work_sync,
> which causes some inconvenience before Before this patch is applied, it
> checks pending work and won't do cancel_delayed_work_sync in this boot up
> phase.

So, cancel_delayed_work_sync() usually shouldn't be called with irq
disabled as it's a possibly blocking call.

> The simple calling sequence is like this:
> 
> start_kernel -> of_clk_init -> cpu_clk_init -> pm_qos_add_request(xx,
> default_value),
> 
> then pm_qos_update_request.
> 
> I don't know whether it's meaningful to still check pending work here, or
> it's not suggested to use pm_qos_update_request in this early boot up phase.
> Could you help to share some opinions? (I can fix this issue by adding the
> current qos value directly instead of default value, though.)

Hmmm... but I suppose this is super-early in the boot.  Would it make
sense to have a static variable (e.g. bool clk_fully_initailized) to
gate the cancel_delayed_sync() call?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-01 18:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-01  9:09 [Question] about patch: don't use [delayed_]work_pending() qiaozhou
2016-09-01 18:45 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2016-09-02  1:17   ` qiaozhou
2016-09-02 13:50     ` Tejun Heo
2016-09-02 14:21       ` Tejun Heo
2016-09-03 15:27         ` qiaozhou
2016-09-05  5:34         ` qiaozhou
2016-09-05 12:38           ` [PATCH] power: avoid calling cancel_delayed_work_sync() during early boot Tejun Heo
2016-09-05 12:58             ` Rafael J. Wysocki

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=20160901184503.GD12660@htj.duckdns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=gangwu@asrmicro.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=qiaozhou@asrmicro.com \
    --cc=wilburwang@asrmicro.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).