From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
peter.wang@mediatek.com, stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] PM: runtime: Fix supplier device management during consumer" failed to apply to 5.4-stable tree
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2022 10:22:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <165735495651227@kroah.com> (raw)
The patch below does not apply to the 5.4-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 887371066039011144b4a94af97d9328df6869a2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 21:16:41 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] PM: runtime: Fix supplier device management during consumer
probe
Because pm_runtime_get_suppliers() bumps up the rpm_active counter
of each device link to a supplier of the given device in addition
to bumping up the supplier's PM-runtime usage counter, a runtime
suspend of the consumer device may case the latter to go down to 0
when pm_runtime_put_suppliers() is running on a remote CPU. If that
happens after pm_runtime_put_suppliers() has released power.lock for
the consumer device, and a runtime resume of that device takes place
immediately after it, before pm_runtime_put() is called for the
supplier, that pm_runtime_put() call may cause the supplier to be
suspended even though the consumer is active.
To prevent that from happening, modify pm_runtime_get_suppliers() to
call pm_runtime_get_sync() for the given device's suppliers without
touching the rpm_active counters of the involved device links
Accordingly, modify pm_runtime_put_suppliers() to call pm_runtime_put()
for the given device's suppliers without looking at the rpm_active
counters of the device links at hand. [This is analogous to what
happened before commit 4c06c4e6cf63 ("driver core: Fix possible
supplier PM-usage counter imbalance").]
Since pm_runtime_get_suppliers() sets supplier_preactivated for each
device link where the supplier's PM-runtime usage counter has been
incremented and pm_runtime_put_suppliers() calls pm_runtime_put() for
the suppliers whose device links have supplier_preactivated set, the
PM-runtime usage counter is balanced for each supplier and this is
independent of the runtime suspend and resume of the consumer device.
However, in case a device link with DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME set is dropped
during the consumer device probe, so pm_runtime_get_suppliers() bumps
up the supplier's PM-runtime usage counter, but it cannot be dropped by
pm_runtime_put_suppliers(), make device_link_release_fn() take care of
that.
Fixes: 4c06c4e6cf63 ("driver core: Fix possible supplier PM-usage counter imbalance")
Reported-by: Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Peter Wang <peter.wang@mediatek.com>
Cc: 5.1+ <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 5.1+
diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c
index 58aa49527d3a..460d6f163e41 100644
--- a/drivers/base/core.c
+++ b/drivers/base/core.c
@@ -487,6 +487,16 @@ static void device_link_release_fn(struct work_struct *work)
device_link_synchronize_removal();
pm_runtime_release_supplier(link);
+ /*
+ * If supplier_preactivated is set, the link has been dropped between
+ * the pm_runtime_get_suppliers() and pm_runtime_put_suppliers() calls
+ * in __driver_probe_device(). In that case, drop the supplier's
+ * PM-runtime usage counter to remove the reference taken by
+ * pm_runtime_get_suppliers().
+ */
+ if (link->supplier_preactivated)
+ pm_runtime_put_noidle(link->supplier);
+
pm_request_idle(link->supplier);
put_device(link->consumer);
diff --git a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
index 23cc4c377d77..949907e2e242 100644
--- a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
+++ b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
@@ -1768,7 +1768,6 @@ void pm_runtime_get_suppliers(struct device *dev)
if (link->flags & DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME) {
link->supplier_preactivated = true;
pm_runtime_get_sync(link->supplier);
- refcount_inc(&link->rpm_active);
}
device_links_read_unlock(idx);
@@ -1788,19 +1787,8 @@ void pm_runtime_put_suppliers(struct device *dev)
list_for_each_entry_rcu(link, &dev->links.suppliers, c_node,
device_links_read_lock_held())
if (link->supplier_preactivated) {
- bool put;
-
link->supplier_preactivated = false;
-
- spin_lock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
-
- put = pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev) &&
- refcount_dec_not_one(&link->rpm_active);
-
- spin_unlock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
-
- if (put)
- pm_runtime_put(link->supplier);
+ pm_runtime_put(link->supplier);
}
device_links_read_unlock(idx);
reply other threads:[~2022-07-09 8:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=165735495651227@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=peter.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.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