From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: "sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com" <sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"khilman@linaro.org" <khilman@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: Runtime PM workqueue killing system performance with USB
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 15:32:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140523143230.GC21319@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1405221401350.890-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 07:14:40PM +0100, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2014, Will Deacon wrote:
>
> > > Anyway, there are two possible ways of handling this. One is to avoid
> > > changing the error code to -EBUSY when the device in question is a root
> > > hub. Just let it go into a runtime-PM error state; it won't matter
> > > since the controller doesn't support runtime PM anyway. You can test
> > > this by changing the "if (status != 0)" line in usb_runtime_suspend to
> > >
> > > if (status != 0 && udev->parent)
> >
> > I'd tried something like this already, but I prefer your patch below. Plus,
> > this hack results in a failure being logged to dmesg on the initial suspend
> > attempt.
> >
> > > The other approach is to disable runtime PM for the root hub when the
> > > host controller driver doesn't have a bus_suspend or bus_resume method.
> > > This seems like a cleaner approach; the patch below implements it.
> >
> > Thanks for this! I can confirm that your patch below fixes the issue for me,
> > so:
> >
> > Reported-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > Tested-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>
> You know, I think it might be best to make both changes. Even though
> runtime PM will be disabled by default, the user can always override
> this setting. If that happens, the suspend should fail with the proper
> error code instead of going into a loop.
>
> Do you mind if I add the change to usb_runtime_suspend() in the patch?
That sounds sensible -- if runtime PM is being forced on, then errors are
worth reporting.
Will
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-23 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-22 10:27 Runtime PM workqueue killing system performance with USB Will Deacon
2014-05-22 15:02 ` Alan Stern
2014-05-22 17:39 ` Will Deacon
2014-05-22 18:14 ` Alan Stern
2014-05-23 14:32 ` Will Deacon [this message]
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=20140523143230.GC21319@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=khilman@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com \
--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