linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] genirq: Add runtime resume/suspend support for IRQ chips

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: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1511101017190.3915@nanos>
Date:	Tue, 10 Nov 2015 10:26:27 -0500 (EST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
cc:	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
	Soren Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
	Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] genirq: Add runtime resume/suspend support for
 IRQ chips

Jon,

On Tue, 10 Nov 2015, Jon Hunter wrote:
>  	void		(*irq_suspend)(struct irq_data *data);
>  	void		(*irq_resume)(struct irq_data *data);
> +	int		(*irq_runtime_suspend)(struct irq_data *data);
> +	int		(*irq_runtime_resume)(struct irq_data *data);
>  	void		(*irq_pm_shutdown)(struct irq_data *data);

So this is the second patch within a few days which adds that just
with different names:

http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1446668160-17522-2-git-send-email-soren.brinkmann@xilinx.com

Can you folks please tell me which of the names is the correct one?
  
> +/* Inline functions for support of irq chips that require runtime pm */
> +static inline int chip_runtime_resume(struct irq_desc *desc)
> +{
> +	if (!desc->irq_data.chip->irq_runtime_resume)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	return desc->irq_data.chip->irq_runtime_resume(&desc->irq_data);
> +}
> +
> +static inline int chip_runtime_suspend(struct irq_desc *desc)
> +{
> +	if (!desc->irq_data.chip->irq_runtime_suspend)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	return desc->irq_data.chip->irq_runtime_suspend(&desc->irq_data);

We really don't need a return value for that one.

> +}
> +
>  #define _IRQ_DESC_CHECK		(1 << 0)
>  #define _IRQ_DESC_PERCPU	(1 << 1)
>  
> diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> index 0eebaeef317b..66e33df73140 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> @@ -1116,6 +1116,10 @@ __setup_irq(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc, struct irqaction *new)
>  	if (!try_module_get(desc->owner))
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  
> +	ret = chip_runtime_resume(desc);
> +	if (ret < 0)
> +		return ret;

Leaks module ref count.

> +
>  	new->irq = irq;
>  
>  	/*
> @@ -1393,6 +1397,7 @@ out_thread:
>  		put_task_struct(t);
>  	}
>  out_mput:
> +	chip_runtime_suspend(desc);
>  	module_put(desc->owner);
>  	return ret;
>  }
> @@ -1506,6 +1511,7 @@ static struct irqaction *__free_irq(unsigned int irq, void *dev_id)
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> +	chip_runtime_suspend(desc);
>  	module_put(desc->owner);
>  	kfree(action->secondary);
>  	return action;
> @@ -1792,6 +1798,7 @@ static struct irqaction *__free_percpu_irq(unsigned int irq, void __percpu *dev_
>  
>  	unregister_handler_proc(irq, action);
>  
> +	chip_runtime_suspend(desc);

Where is the corresponding call in request_percpu_irq() ?

Can you folks please agree on something which is correct and complete?

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/