linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dma: dw: Add suspend and resume handling for PCI mode DW

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140120092501.GS26823@intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:55:01 +0530
From:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
To:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.jf.intel.com>
Cc:	"Chew, Chiau Ee" <chiau.ee.chew@...el.com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.linux@...il.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.jf.intel.com>,
	"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma: dw: Add suspend and resume handling for PCI mode
 DW_DMAC.

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:51:29PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 21:19 +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 01:51:47PM +0530, Chew, Chiau Ee wrote:
> 
> > > As mentioned by Andy, we are using *_noirq  verion of suspend/resume PM
> > > callback whereby the callbacks would be executed after IRQ handlers have been
> > > disabled. If using SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS, it would be the normal
> > > suspend/resume PM callback. Looking at the Desginware DMAC platform code
> > > (drivers/dma/dw/platform.c), it is using the *_noirq suspend/resume PM
> > > callback. Is it advisable to use the normal suspend/resume PM callback instead
> > > of *_noirq suspend/PM callback? 
> > 
> > i dont see a reason why we need the noirq versions
> 
> Okay. I imagine the following use case.
> 
> For example we have compiled in DMA driver (dw_dmac) along with, for
> example, SPI driver.
> 
> System was scheduled to go sleep.
> 
> An order of calling IIUC might be DMA first, then SPI (since they are
> not in parent / child relations).
> 
> What was happened when SPI would like to do a DMA transfer and DMA is
> going to sleep? I'm trying to understand if this is a case.
In that case how does no irq version help us?

For these cases, I have been using suspend_late. Since the dmaengine driver is
providing service to other clients (SPI), it needs to esnure that it suspends
after SPI using suspend_late and resume using resume_early. That way dma is
availble whenever the client is active

--
~Vinod

> 
> > > > How about SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS instead?
> > > 
> > > So, we are using *_noirq versions of the functions here. What happened when we switch to normal ones? Any side effects?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> Intel Finland Oy
> 

-- 
--
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/