public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>,
	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
	Jonas Jensen <jonas.jensen@gmail.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] kernel: Add support for restart notifier call chain
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 06:45:24 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53B2BB74.7050300@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140701112413.GQ18313@arm.com>

On 07/01/2014 04:24 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 09:28:51PM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:59:47PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:11:33PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>> Various drivers implement architecture and/or device specific means
>>>> to restart (reset) the system. Various mechanisms have been implemented
>>>> to support those schemes. The best known mechanism is arm_pm_restart,
>>>> which is a function pointer to be set either from platform specific code
>>>> or from drivers. Another mechanism is to use hardware watchdogs to issue
>>>> a reset; this mechanism is used if there is no other method available
>>>> to reset a board or system. Two examples are alim7101_wdt, which currently
>>>> uses the reboot notifier to trigger a reset, and moxart_wdt, which registers
>>>> the arm_pm_restart function.
>>>>
>>>> The existing mechanisms have a number of drawbacks. Typically only one scheme
>>>> to restart the system is supported (at least if arm_pm_restart is used).
>>>> At least in theory there can be mutliple means to restart the system, some of
>>>> which may be less desirable (for example one mechanism may only reset the CPU,
>>>> while another may reset the entire system). Using arm_pm_restart can also be
>>>> racy if the function pointer is set from a driver, as the driver may be in
>>>> the process of being unloaded when arm_pm_restart is called.
>>>> Using the reboot notifier is always racy, as it is unknown if and when
>>>> other functions using the reboot notifier have completed execution
>>>> by the time the watchdog fires.
>>>>
>>>> To solve the problem, introduce a system restart notifier. This notifier
>>>> is expected to be called from the architecture specific machine_restart()
>>>> function. Drivers providing system restart functionality (such as the watchdog
>>>> drivers mentioned above) are expected to register with this notifier.
>>>>
>>>> Patch 1 of this series implements the notifier function. Patches 2 and 3
>>>> implement calling the notifier chain from arm and arm64 restart code.
>>>> Patch 4 and 5 convert existing restart handlers in the watchdog subsystem
>>>> to use the restart notifier. Patch 6 unexports arm_pm_restart to ensure
>>>> that no one gets the idea to implement a restart handler as module.
>>>
>>> I think you need to restructure stuff somewhat, because I think
>>> you've missed drivers/power/reset/ entirely, or at least you've
>>> missed drivers/power/reset/restart-poweroff.c which calls
>>> arm_pm_restart directly.  I'm not quite sure how we ended up with
>>> that...
>>
>> Yes, guess I missed (and did not really expect) that arm_pm_restart
>> is called from multiple places.
>
> Most of the ARM-specific code in drivers/power/reset/ consists of SoC
> power-off/restart back-ends (e.g. vexpress-poweroff.c). Since there is
> no generic pm_restart, we continued to use arm_pm_restart (also for
> arm64 since we share some of the drivers). Maybe some driver model here
> would help.
>
>> What is restart-poweroff supposed to do in the first place, and why
>> doesn't it call machine_restart() ? If it is what I think it is, ie
>> a fallback for pm_power_off, it could be made generic and does not
>> really have to depend on ARM.
>
> I think this one pretends to do a power-off via restart. It could call
> machine_restart() but this only passes the default reboot_mode to
> arm_pm_restart().
>

Unless one sets reboot_mode first. See my proposed patch in
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/30/792.

Guenter


  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-01 13:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-06-30 19:11 [RFC PATCH 0/6] kernel: Add support for restart notifier call chain Guenter Roeck
2014-06-30 19:11 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] " Guenter Roeck
2014-06-30 19:11 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] arm64: Support restart through " Guenter Roeck
2014-07-01  7:26   ` Maxime Ripard
2014-07-01 13:39     ` Guenter Roeck
2014-06-30 19:11 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] arm: " Guenter Roeck
2014-06-30 19:55   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-06-30 19:11 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] watchdog: moxart: Register restart handler with restart notifier Guenter Roeck
2014-06-30 19:11 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] watchdog: alim7101: " Guenter Roeck
2014-06-30 19:11 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] arm/arm64: Unexport restart handlers Guenter Roeck
2014-06-30 19:59 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] kernel: Add support for restart notifier call chain Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-06-30 20:28   ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-01 11:24     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-01 13:45       ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2014-07-01 17:08         ` Catalin Marinas

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=53B2BB74.7050300@roeck-us.net \
    --to=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dbaryshkov@gmail.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=jonas.jensen@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=wim@iguana.be \
    /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