linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
To: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
	 Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, dakr@kernel.org,
	 len.brown@intel.com, pavel@kernel.org, ulf.hansson@linaro.org,
	 daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com,
	geert@linux-m68k.org,  linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org,
	 fabrizio.castro.jz@renesas.com,
	 Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PM: domains: Add devres variant for dev_pm_domain_attach()
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 13:18:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0jUGf9QO6h6bcBcTX+nUbDeD0XMhWj1Qb-0qAtZ8EbVsA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4360ee7a-d85a-4fa0-a1d6-d09a3b9d57c0@tuxon.dev>

On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 11:37 AM Claudiu Beznea
<claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev> wrote:
>
> Hi, Rafael,
>
> On 13.06.2025 13:02, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 9:39 AM Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi, Rafael,
> >>
> >> On 09.06.2025 22:59, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Jun 7, 2025 at 3:06 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 22:01:52 +0200
> >>>> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Rafael,
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 8:55 PM Dmitry Torokhov
> >>>>> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 06:00:34PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 1:18 PM Claudiu <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The dev_pm_domain_attach() function is typically used in bus code alongside
> >>>>>>>> dev_pm_domain_detach(), often following patterns like:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> static int bus_probe(struct device *_dev)
> >>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>     struct bus_driver *drv = to_bus_driver(dev->driver);
> >>>>>>>>     struct bus_device *dev = to_bus_device(_dev);
> >>>>>>>>     int ret;
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>     // ...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>     ret = dev_pm_domain_attach(_dev, true);
> >>>>>>>>     if (ret)
> >>>>>>>>         return ret;
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>     if (drv->probe)
> >>>>>>>>         ret = drv->probe(dev);
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>     // ...
> >>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> static void bus_remove(struct device *_dev)
> >>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>     struct bus_driver *drv = to_bus_driver(dev->driver);
> >>>>>>>>     struct bus_device *dev = to_bus_device(_dev);
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>     if (drv->remove)
> >>>>>>>>         drv->remove(dev);
> >>>>>>>>     dev_pm_domain_detach(_dev);
> >>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> When the driver's probe function uses devres-managed resources that depend
> >>>>>>>> on the power domain state, those resources are released later during
> >>>>>>>> device_unbind_cleanup().
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Releasing devres-managed resources that depend on the power domain state
> >>>>>>>> after detaching the device from its PM domain can cause failures.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For example, if the driver uses devm_pm_runtime_enable() in its probe
> >>>>>>>> function, and the device's clocks are managed by the PM domain, then
> >>>>>>>> during removal the runtime PM is disabled in device_unbind_cleanup() after
> >>>>>>>> the clocks have been removed from the PM domain. It may happen that the
> >>>>>>>> devm_pm_runtime_enable() action causes the device to be runtime-resumed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Don't use devm_pm_runtime_enable() then.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What about other devm_ APIs? Are you suggesting that platform drivers
> >>>>>> should not be using devm_clk*(), devm_regulator_*(),
> >>>>>> devm_request_*_irq() and devm_add_action_or_reset()? Because again,
> >>>>>> dev_pm_domain_detach() that is called by platform bus_remove() may shut
> >>>>>> off the device too early, before cleanup code has a chance to execute
> >>>>>> proper cleanup.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The issue is not limited to runtime PM.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If the driver specific runtime PM APIs access registers directly, this
> >>>>>>>> will lead to accessing device registers without clocks being enabled.
> >>>>>>>> Similar issues may occur with other devres actions that access device
> >>>>>>>> registers.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Add devm_pm_domain_attach(). When replacing the dev_pm_domain_attach() and
> >>>>>>>> dev_pm_domain_detach() in bus probe and bus remove, it ensures that the
> >>>>>>>> device is detached from its PM domain in device_unbind_cleanup(), only
> >>>>>>>> after all driver's devres-managed resources have been release.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For flexibility, the implemented devm_pm_domain_attach() has 2 state
> >>>>>>>> arguments, one for the domain state on attach, one for the domain state on
> >>>>>>>> detach.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> dev_pm_domain_attach() is not part driver API and I'm not convinced at
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Is the concern that devm_pm_domain_attach() will be [ab]used by drivers?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, among other things.
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe naming could make abuse at least obvious to spot? e.g.
> >>>> pm_domain_attach_with_devm_release()
> >>>
> >>> If I'm not mistaken, it is not even necessary to use devres for this.
> >>>
> >>> You might as well add a dev_pm_domain_detach() call to
> >>> device_unbind_cleanup() after devres_release_all().  There is a slight
> >>> complication related to the second argument of it, but I suppose that
> >>> this can be determined at the attach time and stored in a new device
> >>> PM flag, or similar.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I looked into this solution. I've tested it for all my failure cases and
> >> went good.
> >
> > OK
> >
> >>> Note that dev->pm_domain is expected to be cleared by ->detach(), so
> >>> this should not cause the domain to be detached twice in a row from
> >>> the same device, but that needs to be double-checked.
> >>
> >> The genpd_dev_pm_detach() calls genpd_remove_device() ->
> >> dev_pm_domain_set(dev, NULL) which sets the dev->pm_domain = NULL. I can't
> >> find any other detach function in the current code base.
> >
> > There is also acpi_dev_pm_detach() which can be somewhat hard to find,
> > but it calls dev_pm_domain_set(dev, NULL) either.
> >
> >> The code I've tested for this solution is this one:
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
> >> index b526e0e0f52d..5e9750d007b4 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/base/dd.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
> >> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> >>  #include <linux/kthread.h>
> >>  #include <linux/wait.h>
> >>  #include <linux/async.h>
> >> +#include <linux/pm_domain.h>
> >>  #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> >>  #include <linux/pinctrl/devinfo.h>
> >>  #include <linux/slab.h>
> >> @@ -552,8 +553,11 @@ static void device_unbind_cleanup(struct device *dev)
> >>         dev->dma_range_map = NULL;
> >>         device_set_driver(dev, NULL);
> >>         dev_set_drvdata(dev, NULL);
> >> -       if (dev->pm_domain && dev->pm_domain->dismiss)
> >> -               dev->pm_domain->dismiss(dev);
> >> +       if (dev->pm_domain) {
> >> +               if (dev->pm_domain->dismiss)
> >> +                       dev->pm_domain->dismiss(dev);
> >> +               dev_pm_domain_detach(dev, dev->pm_domain->detach_power_off);
> >
> > I would do the "detach" before the "dismiss" to retain the current ordering.
>
> I applied on my local development branch all your suggestions except this
> one because genpd_dev_pm_detach() as well as acpi_dev_pm_detach() set
> dev->pm_domain = NULL.
>
> Due to this I would call first ->dismiss() then ->detach(), as initially
> proposed. Please let me know if you consider it otherwise.

This is a matter of adding one more dev->pm_domain check AFAICS, but OK.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-16 11:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-06 11:17 [PATCH v3 0/2] PM: domains: add devm_pm_domain_attach() Claudiu
2025-06-06 11:17 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] PM: domains: Add devres variant for dev_pm_domain_attach() Claudiu
2025-06-06 16:00   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-06 18:55     ` Dmitry Torokhov
2025-06-06 20:01       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-07 11:43         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-07 13:06         ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-06-09 19:59           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-11  9:11             ` Claudiu Beznea
2025-06-11 16:27               ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-06-11 16:23             ` Jonathan Cameron
2025-06-11 16:35               ` Dmitry Torokhov
2025-06-13  7:39             ` Claudiu Beznea
2025-06-13 10:02               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-13 12:44                 ` Claudiu Beznea
2025-06-16  9:37                 ` Claudiu Beznea
2025-06-16 11:18                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2025-06-16 11:37                     ` Claudiu Beznea
2025-06-16 11:47                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-19 12:21                         ` Ulf Hansson
2025-06-21 11:15                           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-06 11:17 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] driver core: platform: Use devm_pm_domain_attach() Claudiu

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=CAJZ5v0jUGf9QO6h6bcBcTX+nUbDeD0XMhWj1Qb-0qAtZ8EbVsA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com \
    --cc=claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev \
    --cc=dakr@kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=fabrizio.castro.jz@renesas.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pavel@kernel.org \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).