linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PM-runtime: add tracepoints for usage

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: <20200104182123.GA1485543@kroah.com>
Date:   Sat, 4 Jan 2020 19:21:23 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM-runtime: add tracepoints for usage_count changes

On Sat, Jan 04, 2020 at 05:27:57PM +0100, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> Add tracepoints to remaining places where device's power.usage_count
> is changed. This helps debugging where and why autosuspend is prevented.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
> ---
>  drivers/base/power/runtime.c | 13 +++++++++++--
>  include/trace/events/rpm.h   |  6 ++++++
>  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> index 48616f358854..16134a69bf6f 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> @@ -1006,8 +1006,10 @@ int __pm_runtime_idle(struct device *dev, int rpmflags)
>  	int retval;
>  
>  	if (rpmflags & RPM_GET_PUT) {
> -		if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&dev->power.usage_count))
> +		if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&dev->power.usage_count)) {
> +			trace_rpm_usage_rcuidle(dev, rpmflags);

Who and what is really going to use these tracepoints?

And putting them in these if statements seems odd, are you sure that's
the correct place?  What do these show to userspace?

>  			return 0;
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	might_sleep_if(!(rpmflags & RPM_ASYNC) && !dev->power.irq_safe);
> @@ -1038,8 +1040,10 @@ int __pm_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev, int rpmflags)
>  	int retval;
>  
>  	if (rpmflags & RPM_GET_PUT) {
> -		if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&dev->power.usage_count))
> +		if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&dev->power.usage_count)) {
> +			trace_rpm_usage_rcuidle(dev, rpmflags);
>  			return 0;
> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	might_sleep_if(!(rpmflags & RPM_ASYNC) && !dev->power.irq_safe);
> @@ -1101,6 +1105,7 @@ int pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(struct device *dev)
>  	retval = dev->power.disable_depth > 0 ? -EINVAL :
>  		dev->power.runtime_status == RPM_ACTIVE
>  			&& atomic_inc_not_zero(&dev->power.usage_count);
> +	trace_rpm_usage_rcuidle(dev, 0);

Why this one?


>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->power.lock, flags);
>  	return retval;
>  }
> @@ -1434,6 +1439,8 @@ void pm_runtime_allow(struct device *dev)
>  	dev->power.runtime_auto = true;
>  	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&dev->power.usage_count))
>  		rpm_idle(dev, RPM_AUTO | RPM_ASYNC);
> +	else
> +		trace_rpm_usage_rcuidle(dev, RPM_AUTO | RPM_ASYNC);

Are you sure this is correct?

These feel odd...

thanks,

greg k-h