[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <158769608929.135303.4217396252503884167@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 19:41:29 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To: Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com
Cc: mka@...omium.org, mkshah@...eaurora.org, evgreen@...omium.org,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: We aren't notified of our own failure w/ NOTIFY_BAD
Quoting Stephen Boyd (2020-04-23 19:38:24)
> Quoting Douglas Anderson (2020-04-22 14:55:00)
> > When a PM Notifier returns NOTIFY_BAD it doesn't get called with
> > CPU_PM_ENTER_FAILED. It only get called for CPU_PM_ENTER_FAILED if
> > someone else (further down the notifier chain) returns NOTIFY_BAD.
> >
> > Handle this case by taking our CPU out of the list of ones that have
> > entered PM. Without this it's possible we could detect that the last
> > CPU went down (and we would flush) even if some CPU was alive. That's
> > not good since our flushing routines currently assume they're running
> > on the last CPU for mutual exclusion.
> >
> > Fixes: 985427f997b6 ("soc: qcom: rpmh: Invoke rpmh_flush() for dirty caches")
> > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> > ---
>
> Reported-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
Scratch that one! Copy/paste for the lose.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists