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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFrbC6Qh1mENctZQo1y3Mb3w3fSE8X3iYnChrmxhUpBXkQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 19:59:11 +0200 From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] amba: Don't unprepare the clocks if device driver wants IRQ safe runtime PM On 16 September 2014 21:52, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 08:25:25PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> On 16 September 2014 14:59, Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com> wrote: >> > The AMBA bus driver defines runtime Power Management functions which >> > disable and unprepare AMBA bus clock. This is problematic for runtime PM >> > because unpreparing a clock might sleep so it is not interrupt safe. >> > >> > However some drivers may want to implement runtime PM functions in >> > interrupt-safe way (see pm_runtime_irq_safe()). In such case the AMBA >> > bus driver should only disable/enable the clock in runtime suspend and >> > resume callbacks. >> > >> > Detect the device driver behavior after calling its probe function and >> > store it. During runtime suspend/resume deal with clocks according to >> > stored value. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com> >> > --- >> > drivers/amba/bus.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---- >> > include/linux/amba/bus.h | 1 + >> > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/amba/bus.c b/drivers/amba/bus.c >> > index 3cf61a127ee5..e8fd5706954f 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/amba/bus.c >> > +++ b/drivers/amba/bus.c >> > @@ -94,8 +94,18 @@ static int amba_pm_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev) >> > struct amba_device *pcdev = to_amba_device(dev); >> > int ret = pm_generic_runtime_suspend(dev); >> > >> > - if (ret == 0 && dev->driver) >> > - clk_disable_unprepare(pcdev->pclk); >> > + if (ret == 0 && dev->driver) { >> > + /* >> > + * Drivers should not change pm_runtime_irq_safe() >> > + * after probe. >> > + */ >> > + WARN_ON(pcdev->irq_safe != pm_runtime_is_irq_safe(dev)); >> >> Do we really need a WARN_ON here. Driver shouldn't update their >> irq_safe value dynamically, right!? > > The driver shouldn't update it dynamically, and this makes sure *that* > is enforced since we end up depending on that property. Hence the > check is sensible (and I even suggested it.) The WARN_ON could be nice to have, but I think this is a task for PM core to handle. Copying flags shouldn't be needed for each an every instance of a driver/bus that manage irq_safe devices. That's my main point. > >> > + >> > + if (pcdev->irq_safe) >> > + clk_disable(pcdev->pclk); >> >> Since the irq_safe flag, could be considered as a special case, an >> option for these cases - could be to leave the clock to be entirely >> handled from the driver's runtime PM callback instead. > > Too many sub-clauses to make much sense of that statement. Sorry, agree. :-) > > I don't want drivers messing around with this stuff. This is the /bus/ > clock, not a device specific clock. For irq_safe devices, driver's will need to handle the clk_prepare|unprepare during system PM anyway. That's the reason to why I suggested this. On the other hand I agree with you, it's a bus clock... Kind regards Uffe -- 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