From: "Fu, Zhonghui" <zhonghui.fu@linux.intel.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com>,
Andreas Fenkart <afenkart@gmail.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] MMC/SDIO: enable SDIO device to suspend/resume asynchronously
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 12:00:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56528F63.2020801@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <564B3020.5060104@linux.intel.com>
On 11/17/2015 9:48 PM, Fu, Zhonghui wrote:
>
> On 11/16/2015 7:30 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> On 15 November 2015 at 14:53, Fu, Zhonghui <zhonghui.fu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>> Now, PM core supports asynchronous suspend/resume mode for devices
>>> during system suspend/resume, and the power state transition of one
>>> device may be completed in separate kernel thread. PM core ensures
>>> all power state transition timing dependency between devices. This
>>> patch enables SDIO card and function devices to suspend/resume
>>> asynchronously. This will take advantage of multicore and improve
>>> system suspend/resume speed. After enabling the SDIO devices and all
>>> their child devices to suspend/resume asynchronously on ASUS T100TA,
>>> the system suspend-to-idle time is reduced from 1645ms to 1119ms, and
>>> the system resume time is reduced from 940ms to 918ms.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Zhonghui Fu <zhonghui.fu@linux.intel.com>
>> I think this is an interesting change, but I wonder if you really
>> understand how this affects the order of how devices may be
>> suspended/resumed?
>>
>> Also, I believe you didn't answer my question for the earlier version
>> of the patch, so let me try again.
>>
>> There are a strict dependency chain when suspending/resuming devices
>> that must be maintained. Currently this is controlled via device
>> registration/probe order.
>>
>> An SDIO func driver/device must always be suspended *before* the SDIO
>> card device. Additionally the corresponding MMC host, must be
>> suspended after the SDIO card device. Vice verse applies to the resume
>> sequence.
>>
>> As this patch enables asynchronous suspend, I am worried that it will
>> break this dependency chain. What do you think?
> After enabling asynchronous suspend/resume, PM core still ensures the strict suspend/resume dependency between child and parent devices - child must be suspended before its parent, and parent must be resumed before its child. SDIO function is child of SDIO card, and SDIO card is child of MMC host, and MMC host is child of MMC controller. So the dependency chain is not broken. Actually, many devices have been using asynchronous suspend/resume mode now.
Any comments are welcome.
Thanks,
Zhonghui
>
> Thanks,
> Zhonghui
>> Kind regards
>> Ulf Hansson
>>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v3:
>>> - Add test result in commit message
>>>
>>> drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c | 4 ++++
>>> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c
>>> index 16d838e..530ce88 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c
>>> @@ -1113,6 +1113,8 @@ int mmc_attach_sdio(struct mmc_host *host)
>>> pm_runtime_enable(&card->dev);
>>> }
>>>
>>> + device_enable_async_suspend(&card->dev);
>>> +
>>> /*
>>> * The number of functions on the card is encoded inside
>>> * the ocr.
>>> @@ -1133,6 +1135,8 @@ int mmc_attach_sdio(struct mmc_host *host)
>>> */
>>> if (host->caps & MMC_CAP_POWER_OFF_CARD)
>>> pm_runtime_enable(&card->sdio_func[i]->dev);
>>> +
>>> + device_enable_async_suspend(&card->sdio_func[i]->dev);
>>> }
>>>
>>> /*
>>> -- 1.7.1
>>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-23 4:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-15 13:53 [PATCH v3] MMC/SDIO: enable SDIO device to suspend/resume asynchronously Fu, Zhonghui
2015-11-16 11:30 ` Ulf Hansson
2015-11-17 13:48 ` Fu, Zhonghui
2015-11-23 4:00 ` Fu, Zhonghui [this message]
2015-11-23 15:26 ` Ulf Hansson
2015-11-26 14:37 ` Fu, Zhonghui
2015-11-26 17:52 ` Ulf Hansson
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=56528F63.2020801@linux.intel.com \
--to=zhonghui.fu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=afenkart@gmail.com \
--cc=jh80.chung@samsung.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.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