linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] PM / Wakeirq: Add automated device wake IRQ handling

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: <3499196.MCAcS31ICO@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Fri, 15 May 2015 00:00:40 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	Andreas Fenkart <afenkart@...il.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Huiquan Zhong <huiquan.zhong@...el.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
	Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] PM / Wakeirq: Add automated device wake IRQ handling

On Thursday, May 14, 2015 02:15:01 PM Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> [150514 09:01]:
> > * Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com> [150513 19:09]:
> > > > +void dev_pm_enable_wake_irq(struct device *dev)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct wake_irq *wirq = dev->power.wakeirq;
> > > > +
> > > > +	if (wirq && wirq->manage_irq)
> > > > +		enable_irq(wirq->irq);
> > > > +}
> > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_pm_enable_wake_irq);
> > > 
> > > you probably want to enable dev_pm_enable_wake_irq() automatically for
> > > from rpm_suspend(). According to runtime_pm documentation, wakeup should
> > > always be enabled for runtime suspended devices. I didn't really look
> > > through the whole thing yet to know if you did call it or not.
> > 
> > Yes I think we can also automate that part, I've been playing with an
> > additional patch doing that for pm runtime. Been still thinking if
> > there's any need to manage that in the consomer driver, I guess not.
> 
> Here's what that would roughly look and now I also remember why
> I did not include it. It adds currently extra checks also for
> devices not using dedicated wakeirqs. But basically this would
> allow leaving out the enable/disable PM runtime calls from drivers.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Tony
> 
> 8< -------------------
> --- a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/export.h>
>  #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> +#include <linux/pm_wakeirq.h>
>  #include <trace/events/rpm.h>
>  #include "power.h"
>  
> @@ -514,6 +515,7 @@ static int rpm_suspend(struct device *dev, int rpmflags)
>  
>  	callback = RPM_GET_CALLBACK(dev, runtime_suspend);
>  
> +	dev_pm_enable_wake_irq(dev);
>  	retval = rpm_callback(callback, dev);
>  	if (retval)
>  		goto fail;
> @@ -552,6 +554,7 @@ static int rpm_suspend(struct device *dev, int rpmflags)
>  	return retval;
>  
>   fail:
> +	dev_pm_disable_wake_irq(dev);
>  	__update_runtime_status(dev, RPM_ACTIVE);
>  	dev->power.deferred_resume = false;
>  	wake_up_all(&dev->power.wait_queue);
> @@ -734,10 +737,12 @@ static int rpm_resume(struct device *dev, int rpmflags)
>  
>  	callback = RPM_GET_CALLBACK(dev, runtime_resume);
>  
> +	dev_pm_disable_wake_irq(dev);
>  	retval = rpm_callback(callback, dev);
>  	if (retval) {
>  		__update_runtime_status(dev, RPM_SUSPENDED);
>  		pm_runtime_cancel_pending(dev);
> +		dev_pm_enable_wake_irq(dev);
>  	} else {
>   no_callback:
>  		__update_runtime_status(dev, RPM_ACTIVE);
> @@ -1427,6 +1432,7 @@ int pm_runtime_force_suspend(struct device *dev)
>  		goto err;
>  	}
>  
> +	dev_pm_enable_wake_irq(dev);

Why here?  This is for system suspend.

>  	ret = callback(dev);
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto err;
> @@ -1434,6 +1440,7 @@ int pm_runtime_force_suspend(struct device *dev)
>  	pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev);
>  	return 0;
>  err:
> +	dev_pm_disable_wake_irq(dev);
>  	pm_runtime_enable(dev);
>  	return ret;
>  }
> @@ -1463,6 +1470,7 @@ int pm_runtime_force_resume(struct device *dev)
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> +	dev_pm_disable_wake_irq(dev);

This one too.

>  	ret = callback(dev);
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto out;
> @@ -1470,6 +1478,7 @@ int pm_runtime_force_resume(struct device *dev)
>  	pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
>  	pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(dev);
>  out:
> +	dev_pm_enable_wake_irq(dev);
>  	pm_runtime_enable(dev);
>  	return ret;
>  }
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/