Re: [PATCH v5 11/23] PM: EM: Add API for updating the runtime modifiable EM

Lukasz Luba
2024-01-04T16:54:06Z

On 1/4/24 15:45, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 20/12/2023 09:06, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/12/23 18:50, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>>> On 29/11/2023 12:08, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> +int em_dev_update_perf_domain(struct device *dev,
>>>> +                  struct em_perf_table __rcu *new_table)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    struct em_perf_table __rcu *old_table;
>>>> +    struct em_perf_domain *pd;
>>>> +
>>>> +    /*
>>>> +     * The lock serializes update and unregister code paths. When the
>>>> +     * EM has been unregistered in the meantime, we should capture that
>>>> +     * when entering this critical section. It also makes sure that
>>>
>>> What do you want to capture here? You want to block in this moment,
>>> right? Don't understand the 2. sentence here.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>> There is general issue with module... they can reload. A driver which
>> registered EM can than later disappear. I had similar issues for the
>> devfreq cooling. It can happen at any time. In this scenario let's
>> consider scenario w/ 2 kernel drivers:
>> 1. Main driver which registered EM, e.g. GPU driver
>> 2. Thermal driver which updates that EM
>> When 1. starts unload process, it has to make sure that it will
>> not free the main EM 'pd', because the 2. might try to use e.g.
>> 'pd->nr_perf_states' while doing update at the moment.
>> Thus, this 'pd' has local mutex, to avoid issues of
>> module unload vs. EM update. The EM unregister will block on
>> that mutex and let the background update finish it's critical
>> section.
>
> All true but wouldn't
>
> /* Serialize update/unregister or concurrent updates */
>
> be sufficient as a comment here?
>

Sounds good, I'll change that.