[PATCH v6 0/1] remoteproc: core: do pm relax when in

[PATCH v6 0/1] remoteproc: core: do pm relax when in

[Maria Yu]

If the remote processor is offline, no need to recover anything, and
pm_relax is needed to be called.


summary from some discussion points:

pm_stay_awake() is needed to stop and reverse the suspend process that
is currently underway.

RPROC_OFFLINE state indicate there is no recovery process
is in progress and no chance to do the pm_relax.
Because when recovering from crash, rproc->lock is held and
state is RPROC_CRASHED -> RPROC_OFFLINE -> RPROC_RUNNING,
and then unlock rproc->lock.
When the state is in RPROC_OFFLINE it means separate request
of rproc_stop was done and no need to hold the wakeup source
in crash handler to recover any more.


Changelog
===
V6
---
Address the comments.
Drop the allocate ordered workqueue change.

V5
---
Use goto out instead of directly call pm_relax and return. Suggested by
Mathieu.
Add new change with allocate ordered workqueue for allow only 1 active
work.

V4
---
Add pm relax when in RPROC_OFFLINE.

previous discussion here:
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1bcd3fe8-f68d-ea7f-c0f9-68771e3421d5@quicinc.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-remoteproc/20221202094532.2925-1-quic_aiquny@quicinc.com/T/#t

Maria Yu (1):
  remoteproc: core: do pm_relax when in RPROC_OFFLINE state

 drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 9 ++++++++-
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

-- 
2.17.1

[PATCH v6 1/1] remoteproc: core: do pm_relax when in RPROC_OFFLINE state

[Maria Yu]

Make sure that pm_relax() happens even when the remoteproc
is stopped before the crash handler work is scheduled.

Signed-off-by: Maria Yu <quic_aiquny@quicinc.com>
---
 drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 9 ++++++++-
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
index 8768cb64f560..7419e1460f2a 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
@@ -1862,12 +1862,18 @@ static void rproc_crash_handler_work(struct work_struct *work)
 
 	mutex_lock(&rproc->lock);
 
-	if (rproc->state == RPROC_CRASHED || rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) {
+	if (rproc->state == RPROC_CRASHED) {
 		/* handle only the first crash detected */
 		mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
 		return;
 	}
 
+	if (rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) {
+		/* Don't recover if the remote processor was stopped */
+		mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
+		goto out;
+	}
+
 	rproc->state = RPROC_CRASHED;
 	dev_err(dev, "handling crash #%u in %s\n", ++rproc->crash_cnt,
 		rproc->name);
@@ -1877,6 +1883,7 @@ static void rproc_crash_handler_work(struct work_struct *work)
 	if (!rproc->recovery_disabled)
 		rproc_trigger_recovery(rproc);
 
+out:
 	pm_relax(rproc->dev.parent);
 }
 
-- 
2.17.1

Re: [PATCH v6 1/1] remoteproc: core: do pm_relax when in RPROC_OFFLINE state

[Mathieu Poirier]

On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 09:59:57AM +0800, Maria Yu wrote:
> Make sure that pm_relax() happens even when the remoteproc
> is stopped before the crash handler work is scheduled.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Maria Yu <quic_aiquny@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 9 ++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index 8768cb64f560..7419e1460f2a 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -1862,12 +1862,18 @@ static void rproc_crash_handler_work(struct work_struct *work)
>  
>  	mutex_lock(&rproc->lock);
>  
> -	if (rproc->state == RPROC_CRASHED || rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) {
> +	if (rproc->state == RPROC_CRASHED) {
>  		/* handle only the first crash detected */
>  		mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> +	if (rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) {
> +		/* Don't recover if the remote processor was stopped */
> +		mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
>  	rproc->state = RPROC_CRASHED;
>  	dev_err(dev, "handling crash #%u in %s\n", ++rproc->crash_cnt,
>  		rproc->name);
> @@ -1877,6 +1883,7 @@ static void rproc_crash_handler_work(struct work_struct *work)
>  	if (!rproc->recovery_disabled)
>  		rproc_trigger_recovery(rproc);
>  
> +out:
>  	pm_relax(rproc->dev.parent);

I have applied this patch.

Thanks,
Mathieu

>  }
>  
> -- 
> 2.17.1
>