From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] PM-runtime: Check supplier_preactivated before release supplier
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 18:01:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <12028598.O9o76ZdvQC@kreacher> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0gTpv2gt_Gm9rUd+8Jmp4=ij2=J20o7qO0sC-hm=w3=_A@mail.gmail.com>
[Add CCs to linix-pm, LKML and Greg]
On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 5:32:00 PM CEST Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 4:47 PM Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 6/29/22 9:22 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 5:02 AM Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 6/28/22 11:54 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 3:53 AM Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com> wrote:
> > >>>> On 6/28/22 3:00 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >>>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 2:08 PM <peter.wang@mediatek.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>> From: Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> With divice link of DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME, if consumer call pm_runtime_get_suppliers
> > >>>>>> to prevent supplier enter suspend, pm_runtime_release_supplier should
> > >>>>>> check supplier_preactivated before let supplier enter suspend.
> > >>>>> Why?
> > >>>> because supplier_preactivated is true means supplier cannot enter
> > >>>> suspend, right?
> > >>> No, it doesn't mean that.
> > >> Hi Rafael,
> > >>
> > >> if supplier_preactivated is true, means someone call
> > >> pm_runtime_get_suppliers and
> > >> before pm_runtime_put_suppliers right? This section suppliers should not
> > >> enter suspend.
> > > No, this is not how this is expected to work.
> > >
> > > First off, the only caller of pm_runtime_get_suppliers() and
> > > pm_runtime_put_suppliers() is __driver_probe_device(). Really nobody
> > > else has any business that would require calling them.
> > Hi Rafael,
> >
> > Yes, you are right!
> > __driver_probe_device the only one use and just because
> > __driver_probe_device use
> > pm_runtime_get_suppliers cause problem.
> >
> >
> > > Second, the role of pm_runtime_get_suppliers() is to "preactivate" the
> > > suppliers before running probe for a consumer device and the role of
> >
> > the role of pm_runtime_get_suppliers() is to "preactivate" the suppliers,
> > but suppliers may suspend immediately after preactivate right?
> > Here is just this case. this is first racing point.
> > Thread A: pm_runtime_get_suppliers -> __driver_probe_device
> > Thread B: pm_runtime_release_supplier
> > Thread A: Run with supplier not preactivate -> __driver_probe_device
> >
> > > pm_runtime_put_suppliers() is to do the cleanup in case the device is
> > > left in suspend after probing.
> > >
> > > IOW, pm_runtime_get_suppliers() is to ensure that the suppliers will
> > > be active until the probe callback takes over and the rest depends on
> > > that callback.
> >
> > The problem of this racing will finally let consumer is active but
> > supplier is suspended.
>
> So it would be better to send a bug report regarding this.
>
> > The link relation is broken.
> > I know you may curious how it happened? right?
> > Honestly, I am not sure, but I think the second racing point
> > is rpm_get_suppliers and pm_runtime_put_suppliers(release rpm_active).
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "the racing point".
>
> Yes, these functions can run concurrently.
>
> > So, I try to fix the first racing point and the problem is gone.
> > It is full meet expect, and the pm runtime will work smoothly after
> > __driver_probe_device done.
>
> I'm almost sure that there is at least one scenario that would be
> broken by this change.
That said, the code in there may be a bit overdesigned.
Does the patch below help?
---
drivers/base/power/runtime.c | 14 +-------------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 13 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
@@ -1768,7 +1768,6 @@ void pm_runtime_get_suppliers(struct dev
if (link->flags & DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME) {
link->supplier_preactivated = true;
pm_runtime_get_sync(link->supplier);
- refcount_inc(&link->rpm_active);
}
device_links_read_unlock(idx);
@@ -1788,19 +1787,8 @@ void pm_runtime_put_suppliers(struct dev
list_for_each_entry_rcu(link, &dev->links.suppliers, c_node,
device_links_read_lock_held())
if (link->supplier_preactivated) {
- bool put;
-
link->supplier_preactivated = false;
-
- spin_lock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
-
- put = pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev) &&
- refcount_dec_not_one(&link->rpm_active);
-
- spin_unlock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
-
- if (put)
- pm_runtime_put(link->supplier);
+ pm_runtime_put(link->supplier);
}
device_links_read_unlock(idx);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-29 16:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-13 12:07 [PATCH v1] PM-runtime: Check supplier_preactivated before release supplier peter.wang
2022-06-22 6:09 ` Peter Wang
2022-06-22 6:48 ` Greg KH
2022-06-27 14:14 ` Greg KH
2022-06-27 14:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-06-28 1:49 ` Peter Wang
2022-06-27 19:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-06-28 1:53 ` Peter Wang
2022-06-28 15:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
[not found] ` <b55d5691-0b2d-56bb-26ff-dcac56770611@mediatek.com>
[not found] ` <CAJZ5v0gTpv2gt_Gm9rUd+8Jmp4=ij2=J20o7qO0sC-hm=w3=_A@mail.gmail.com>
2022-06-29 16:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2022-06-30 14:26 ` Peter Wang
2022-06-30 14:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-06-30 15:19 ` Peter Wang
2022-06-30 16:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-07-01 10:21 ` Peter Wang
2022-08-02 3:19 ` Peter Wang
2022-08-02 11:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-08-02 13:33 ` Peter Wang
2022-10-12 10:31 ` Nitin Rawat
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=12028598.O9o76ZdvQC@kreacher \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peter.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
/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