| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 13:41:15 +0100
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Chris Ball <chris@...ntf.net>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>,
"Wang, Xiaoming" <xiaoming.wang@...el.com>,
"Dong, Chuanxiao" <chuanxiao.dong@...el.com>
Cc: "linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
"Liu, Chuansheng" <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mmc: core: Invoke sdio func driver's PM callbacks
from the sdio bus
On 12 March 2014 07:26, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com> wrote:
> On 03/12/2014 11:44 AM, Dong, Chuanxiao wrote:
>> Hi Aaron,
>>
>> This patch is tested on Intel platform, and SDIO function driver's suspend/resume callback will only be called once, which fixed this issue. Previously, they can be called twice.
>>
>> Here is the tested-by:
>>
>> Tested-by: xiaoming wang <xiaoming.wang@...el.com>
>> Tested-by: Chuanxiao Dong <chuanxiao.dong@...el.com>
>
> Thanks a lot for the test!
>
> -Aaron
>
Thanks for helping out testing!
Just out of curiosity, which sdio func driver did you use (or maybe it
hasn't been upstreamed yet)?
Anyway, I suppose it's ->suspend callback don't return -ENOSYS with
the expectation of the card to be removed?
So I assume you want this to go to stable as well, right?
Kind regards
Uffe
>>
>> Thanks
>> Chuanxiao
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Lu, Aaron
>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:36 AM
>>> To: Ulf Hansson; linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org; Chris Ball; Liu, Chuansheng; Dong,
>>> Chuanxiao
>>> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; NeilBrown; Rafael J. Wysocki
>>> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mmc: core: Invoke sdio func driver's PM callbacks from the
>>> sdio bus
>>>
>>> Hi Chuansheng & Chuanxiao,
>>>
>>> Can you please help us testing this patch on your platform and let us know the test
>>> result? Thanks.
>>>
>>> -Aaron
>>>
>>> On 02/28/2014 07:49 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>>> The sdio func device is added to the driver model after the card
>>>> device.
>>>>
>>>> This means the sdio func device will be suspend before the card device
>>>> and thus resumed after. The consequence are the mmc core don't
>>>> explicity need to protect itself from receiving sdio requests in
>>>> suspended state. Instead that can be handled from the sdio bus, which
>>>> is thus invokes the PM callbacks instead of old dummy function.
>>>>
>>>> In the case were the sdio func driver don't implement the PM callbacks
>>>> the mmc core will in the early phase of system suspend, remove the
>>>> card from the driver model and thus power off it.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>
>>>> Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
>>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Note, this patch has only been compile tested. Would appreciate if
>>>> some with SDIO and a sdio func driver could help out to test this.
>>>> Especially the libertas driver would be nice.
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c | 45 ++++---------------------------------------
>>>> drivers/mmc/core/sdio_bus.c | 14 +-------------
>>>> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c index
>>>> 4d721c6..9933e42 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c
>>>> @@ -943,40 +943,21 @@ static int mmc_sdio_pre_suspend(struct mmc_host
>>> *host)
>>>> */
>>>> static int mmc_sdio_suspend(struct mmc_host *host) {
>>>> - int i, err = 0;
>>>> -
>>>> - for (i = 0; i < host->card->sdio_funcs; i++) {
>>>> - struct sdio_func *func = host->card->sdio_func[i];
>>>> - if (func && sdio_func_present(func) && func->dev.driver) {
>>>> - const struct dev_pm_ops *pmops = func->dev.driver->pm;
>>>> - err = pmops->suspend(&func->dev);
>>>> - if (err)
>>>> - break;
>>>> - }
>>>> - }
>>>> - while (err && --i >= 0) {
>>>> - struct sdio_func *func = host->card->sdio_func[i];
>>>> - if (func && sdio_func_present(func) && func->dev.driver) {
>>>> - const struct dev_pm_ops *pmops = func->dev.driver->pm;
>>>> - pmops->resume(&func->dev);
>>>> - }
>>>> - }
>>>> -
>>>> - if (!err && mmc_card_keep_power(host) && mmc_card_wake_sdio_irq(host))
>>> {
>>>> + if (mmc_card_keep_power(host) && mmc_card_wake_sdio_irq(host)) {
>>>> mmc_claim_host(host);
>>>> sdio_disable_wide(host->card);
>>>> mmc_release_host(host);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> - if (!err && !mmc_card_keep_power(host))
>>>> + if (!mmc_card_keep_power(host))
>>>> mmc_power_off(host);
>>>>
>>>> - return err;
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> static int mmc_sdio_resume(struct mmc_host *host) {
>>>> - int i, err = 0;
>>>> + int err = 0;
>>>>
>>>> BUG_ON(!host);
>>>> BUG_ON(!host->card);
>>>> @@ -1019,24 +1000,6 @@ static int mmc_sdio_resume(struct mmc_host *host)
>>>> wake_up_process(host->sdio_irq_thread);
>>>> mmc_release_host(host);
>>>>
>>>> - /*
>>>> - * If the card looked to be the same as before suspending, then
>>>> - * we proceed to resume all card functions. If one of them returns
>>>> - * an error then we simply return that error to the core and the
>>>> - * card will be redetected as new. It is the responsibility of
>>>> - * the function driver to perform further tests with the extra
>>>> - * knowledge it has of the card to confirm the card is indeed the
>>>> - * same as before suspending (same MAC address for network cards,
>>>> - * etc.) and return an error otherwise.
>>>> - */
>>>> - for (i = 0; !err && i < host->card->sdio_funcs; i++) {
>>>> - struct sdio_func *func = host->card->sdio_func[i];
>>>> - if (func && sdio_func_present(func) && func->dev.driver) {
>>>> - const struct dev_pm_ops *pmops = func->dev.driver->pm;
>>>> - err = pmops->resume(&func->dev);
>>>> - }
>>>> - }
>>>> -
>>>> host->pm_flags &= ~MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER;
>>>> return err;
>>>> }
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio_bus.c b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio_bus.c
>>>> index 92d1ba8..4fa8fef9 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio_bus.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio_bus.c
>>>> @@ -197,20 +197,8 @@ static int sdio_bus_remove(struct device *dev)
>>>>
>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_PM
>>>>
>>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>>>> -static int pm_no_operation(struct device *dev) -{
>>>> - /*
>>>> - * Prevent the PM core from calling SDIO device drivers' suspend
>>>> - * callback routines, which it is not supposed to do, by using this
>>>> - * empty function as the bus type suspend callaback for SDIO.
>>>> - */
>>>> - return 0;
>>>> -}
>>>> -#endif
>>>> -
>>>> static const struct dev_pm_ops sdio_bus_pm_ops = {
>>>> - SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pm_no_operation, pm_no_operation)
>>>> + SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pm_generic_suspend, pm_generic_resume)
>>>> SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(
>>>> pm_generic_runtime_suspend,
>>>> pm_generic_runtime_resume,
>>>>
>>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists