| 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: <1769930.Ws5UzSBdLV@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 01:31:44 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 3/3] input: i8042: Avoid resetting controller on system suspend/resume
On Tuesday, October 06, 2015 03:43:08 PM Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 01:08:30AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 06, 2015 03:34:42 PM Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 12:53:49AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> > > >
> > > > If the upcoming system suspend is not going to be handled by the
> > > > platform firmware, like in the suspend-to-idle case, it is not
> > > > necessary to reset the controller in i8042_pm_suspend(), so avoid
> > > > doing that.
> > > >
> > > > Moreover, if the system resume currently in progress has not been
> > > > started by the platform firmware, like in the suspend-to-idle case,
> > > > i8042_controller_resume() need not be called by i8042_pm_resume(),
> > > > so avoid doing that too in that case.
> > > >
> > > > Additionally, try to catch the event that woke up the system by
> > > > calling the interrupt handler early during system resume if it has
> > > > not been started by the platform firmware.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/input/serio/i8042.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
> > > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
> > > > ===================================================================
> > > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
> > > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
> > > > @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> > > > #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > > > #include <linux/i8042.h>
> > > > #include <linux/slab.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/suspend.h>
> > > >
> > > > #include <asm/io.h>
> > > >
> > > > @@ -1170,7 +1171,8 @@ static int i8042_pm_suspend(struct devic
> > > > {
> > > > int i;
> > > >
> > > > - i8042_controller_reset(true);
> > > > + if (pm_suspend_via_firmware())
> > > > + i8042_controller_reset(true);
> > > >
> > > > /* Set up serio interrupts for system wakeup. */
> > > > for (i = 0; i < I8042_NUM_PORTS; i++) {
> > > > @@ -1183,6 +1185,14 @@ static int i8042_pm_suspend(struct devic
> > > > return 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +static int i8042_pm_resume_noirq(struct device *dev)
> > > > +{
> > > > + if (!pm_resume_via_firmware())
> > > > + i8042_interrupt(0, NULL);
> > > > +
> > > > + return 0;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > static int i8042_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
> > > > {
> > > > int i;
> > > > @@ -1199,7 +1209,7 @@ static int i8042_pm_resume(struct device
> > > > * to bring it in a sane state. (In case of S2D we expect
> > > > * BIOS to reset the controller for us.)
> > > > */
> > > > - return i8042_controller_resume(true);
> > > > + return pm_resume_via_firmware() ? i8042_controller_resume(true) : 0;
> > >
> > > What happens if we were going to suspend via firmware so we reset the
> > > controller but then we got wakeup condition and we actually did not
> > > suspend. What pm_resume_via_firmware() will return in this case?
> >
> > It will return 'false'. Do we need to resume the controller then?
>
> Yes.
>
> > But I guess
> > 'false' should be passed to i8042_controller_resume() in that case?
>
> Yes, we do not need to reset the controller in this case, just
> reactivate multiplexing mode, etc.
So something like this I suppose:
---
drivers/input/serio/i8042.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
#include <linux/platform_device.h>
#include <linux/i8042.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/suspend.h>
#include <asm/io.h>
@@ -1170,7 +1171,8 @@ static int i8042_pm_suspend(struct devic
{
int i;
- i8042_controller_reset(true);
+ if (pm_suspend_via_firmware())
+ i8042_controller_reset(true);
/* Set up serio interrupts for system wakeup. */
for (i = 0; i < I8042_NUM_PORTS; i++) {
@@ -1183,6 +1185,14 @@ static int i8042_pm_suspend(struct devic
return 0;
}
+static int i8042_pm_resume_noirq(struct device *dev)
+{
+ if (!pm_resume_via_firmware())
+ i8042_interrupt(0, NULL);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
static int i8042_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
{
int i;
@@ -1199,7 +1209,8 @@ static int i8042_pm_resume(struct device
* to bring it in a sane state. (In case of S2D we expect
* BIOS to reset the controller for us.)
*/
- return i8042_controller_resume(true);
+ return pm_suspend_via_firmware() ?
+ i8042_controller_resume(pm_resume_via_firmware()) : 0;
}
static int i8042_pm_thaw(struct device *dev)
@@ -1223,6 +1234,7 @@ static int i8042_pm_restore(struct devic
static const struct dev_pm_ops i8042_pm_ops = {
.suspend = i8042_pm_suspend,
+ .resume_noirq = i8042_pm_resume_noirq,
.resume = i8042_pm_resume,
.thaw = i8042_pm_thaw,
.poweroff = i8042_pm_reset,
--
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