| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 19:21:03 +0300
From: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / sleep: fix unbalanced pm runtime disable in
__device_suspend_late()
On 05/20/2016 03:18 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, May 19, 2016 08:11:34 PM Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>> On 05/19/2016 04:38 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Grygorii Strashko
>>> <grygorii.strashko@...com> wrote:
>>>> The PM runtime will be left disabled for the device if its .suspend_late()
>>>> callback fails and async suspend is not allowed for this device. In
>>>> this case device will not be added in dpm_late_early_list and
>>>> dpm_resume_early() will ignore this device, as result PM runtime will
>>>> be disabled for it forever (side effect: after 8 subsequent failures
>>>> for the same device the PM runtime will be reenabled due to
>>>> disable_depth overflow).
>>>>
>>>> Hence, re-enable PM runtime in __device_suspend_late() if
>>>> .suspend_late() callback fails and async suspend is not allowed for
>>>> this device.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/base/power/main.c | 7 +++++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/main.c b/drivers/base/power/main.c
>>>> index 6e7c3cc..9b266e5 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/base/power/main.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/base/power/main.c
>>>> @@ -1207,10 +1207,13 @@ static int __device_suspend_late(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state, bool as
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> error = dpm_run_callback(callback, dev, state, info);
>>>> - if (!error)
>>>> + if (!error) {
>>>> dev->power.is_late_suspended = true;
>>>> - else
>>>> + } else {
>> Point [1]
>>>> async_error = error;
>>>> + if (!is_async(dev))
>>>
>>> Why is the is_async() check necessary here?
>>
>> A: deviceX is suspended *async* and reached point [1], in this case:
>> - deviceX has been added in dpm_late_early_list already
>> - dpm_suspend_late() will detect async_error and call dpm_resume_early()
>> - dpm_resume_early() will call device_resume_early() for deviceX
>> - device_resume_early() will re-enable PM runtime
>> {
>> ...
>> if (!dev->power.is_late_suspended)
>> goto Out;
>>
>> ...
>> Out:
>> TRACE_RESUME(error);
>>
>> pm_runtime_enable(dev);
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> complete_all(&dev->power.completion);
>> return error;
>> }
>>
>>
>> B: deviceX is suspended *sync* and reached point [1], in this case:
>> - deviceX has not been added in dpm_late_early_list yet
>> - dpm_suspend_late() will detect sync_error and call dpm_resume_early()
>> - dpm_resume_early() will ignore deviceX
>>
>> if i'll not check for !is_async(dev) then pm_runtime_enable(dev)
>> will be called twice for deviceX with this patch.
>
> OK, thanks!
>
> So to me, the problem is that we handle failures in that code inconsistently
> depending on whether or not async suspend/resume is enabled for the device.
>
> I'd rather make it consistent than add extra checks to it, so the patch below
> is how I would fix this.
>
> ---
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] PM / sleep: Handle failures in device_suspend_late() consistently
>
> Grygorii Strashko reports:
>
> The PM runtime will be left disabled for the device if its
> .suspend_late() callback fails and async suspend is not allowed
> for this device. In this case device will not be added in
> dpm_late_early_list and dpm_resume_early() will ignore this
> device, as result PM runtime will be disabled for it forever
> (side effect: after 8 subsequent failures for the same device
> the PM runtime will be reenabled due to disable_depth overflow).
>
> To fix this problem, add devices to dpm_late_early_list regardless
> of whether or not device_suspend_late() returns errors for them.
>
> That will ensure failures in there to be handled consistently for
> all devices regardless of their async suspend/resume status.
>
> Reported-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> ---
> drivers/base/power/main.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/base/power/main.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/base/power/main.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/base/power/main.c
> @@ -1267,14 +1267,15 @@ int dpm_suspend_late(pm_message_t state)
> error = device_suspend_late(dev);
>
> mutex_lock(&dpm_list_mtx);
> + if (!list_empty(&dev->power.entry))
> + list_move(&dev->power.entry, &dpm_late_early_list);
> +
> if (error) {
> pm_dev_err(dev, state, " late", error);
> dpm_save_failed_dev(dev_name(dev));
> put_device(dev);
> break;
> }
> - if (!list_empty(&dev->power.entry))
> - list_move(&dev->power.entry, &dpm_late_early_list);
> put_device(dev);
>
> if (async_error)
>
Yep, it works too.
Tested-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
By the way, there is third option:)
+++ b/drivers/base/power/main.c
@@ -1211,8 +1211,7 @@ static int __device_suspend_late(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state, bool as
dev->power.is_late_suspended = true;
} else {
async_error = error;
- if (!is_async(dev))
- pm_runtime_enable(dev);
+ error = 0;
}
--
regards,
-grygorii
Powered by blists - more mailing lists