linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [sound] hdac-codec runtime suspended at PM:Suspend.

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0jrKPNFhgpoL97Ac-k9jAmMa-vzgc-4PD+uuynSMqE2Fw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Mar 2018 11:53:58 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@...el.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        "moderated list:SOUND - SOC LAYER / DYNAMIC AUDIO POWER MANAGEM..." 
        <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [sound] hdac-codec runtime suspended at PM:Suspend.

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 11:38 AM, Anshuman Gupta
<anshuman.gupta@...el.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 12:26:53PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Anshuman Gupta
>> <anshuman.gupta@...el.com> wrote:
>> > Keep hdac-codec to be in runtime suspended while entering to suspend.
>> > If hdac-codec is already in runtime suspend state skip its power down
>> > sequence in prepare, power up sequence in complete phase.
>> >
>> > Avoid resuming hdac controller PCI device 00:1f.3 from runtime suspend
>> > state in case  hdac-codec already in runtime-suspend state, this is
>> > unnecessary and block the direct complete even for hdac controller
>> > PCI device 00:1f.3.
>> >
>> > This enabled direct complete path for hdac-codec and PCI device 00:1f.3.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@...el.com>
>> > ---
>> >  sound/soc/codecs/hdac_hdmi.c | 4 ++++
>> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/hdac_hdmi.c b/sound/soc/codecs/hdac_hdmi.c
>> > index f3b4f4d..810a8a6 100644
>> > --- a/sound/soc/codecs/hdac_hdmi.c
>> > +++ b/sound/soc/codecs/hdac_hdmi.c
>> > @@ -1852,6 +1852,8 @@ static int hdmi_codec_prepare(struct device *dev)
>> >         struct hdac_ext_device *edev = to_hda_ext_device(dev);
>> >         struct hdac_device *hdac = &edev->hdac;
>> >
>> > +       if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev))
>> > +               return 1;
>>
>> This is racy in principle, because the runtime PM status can still
>> change after you've checked here.
>   Will using pm_runtime_disable/pm_runtime_enable for safe check of runtime
>   status avoids this race?

It might help, but is this a leaf device or does it have children?

>> But even if it isn't racy in practice, the following
>> pm_runtime_get_sync() becomes redundant after it, doesn't it?
>   I have no idea but if there can be a case that PCI 00:1f.3 (hdac controller)
>   is runtime suspended and hdac hdmi codec is active, in that case it may be
>   required to use pm_runtime_get_sync() for hdac controller as it is parent of
>   hdac hdmi codec.
>>
>> >         pm_runtime_get_sync(&edev->hdac.dev);
>> >

So it sounds like you need the "get" part, but you don't need the
"sync" one, because you've just checked that the device is not
suspended.

I guess the idea is to return 1 for the direct-complete mechanism to
kick in if the device is already suspended, but otherwise bump up its
reference counter to prevent it from suspending going forward, right?

>> >         /*
>> > @@ -1873,6 +1875,8 @@ static void hdmi_codec_complete(struct device *dev)
>> >         struct hdac_hdmi_priv *hdmi = edev->private_data;
>> >         struct hdac_device *hdac = &edev->hdac;
>> >
>> > +       if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev))
>> > +               return;
>>
>> That, again, is somewhat fragile from the concurrency perspective.
>>

And here you want to avoid the below if the device is still suspended.

Why is the below code located in the ->complete callback anyway?
Shouldn't it be there in the ->resume one?

>> >         /* Power up afg */
>> >         snd_hdac_codec_read(hdac, hdac->afg, 0, AC_VERB_SET_POWER_STATE,
>> >                                                         AC_PWRST_D0);
>> > --
>> > 2.7.4