linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] drm/omap: Fix suspend resume regression after platform data removal

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

Message-ID: <8404d47b-33bb-499f-4d50-33501e7c5921@ti.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Jun 2020 15:49:59 +0300
From:   Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
To:     Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
CC:     <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>, "Andrew F . Davis" <afd@...com>,
        Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@...com>,
        Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@...com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
        Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
        Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>,
        Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] drm/omap: Fix suspend resume regression after
 platform data removal



On 17/06/2020 09:04, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 16/06/2020 19:56, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 16/06/2020 18:30, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>>> * Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com> [200616 13:02]:
>>>> On 11/06/2020 17:00, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>>>>> I think, suspend might be fixed if all devices, which are now child of ti-sysc, will do
>>>>> pm_runtime_force_xxx() calls at noirq suspend stage by adding:
>>>>>
>>>>>       SET_NOIRQ_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pm_runtime_force_suspend,
>>>>>                         pm_runtime_force_resume)
>>>>>
>>>>> Am I missing smth?
>>>>
>>>> Isn't this almost exactly the same my patch does? I just used suspend_late
>>>> and resume_early. Is noirq phase better than late & early?
>>>
>>> Well up to you as far as I'm concerned. The noirq phase comes with serious
>>> limitations, for let's say i2c bus usage if needed. Probably also harder
>>> to debug for suspend and resume.
>>
>> Unfortunately, you can't use PM runtime force API at .suspend() stage as pm_runtime_get will still work and
>> there is no sync between suspend and pm_runtime.
>> The PM runtime force API can be used only during late/noirq as at this time pm_runtime is disabled.
> 
> Yes, but which one... Do you know what the diff is with late/noirq from driver's perspective? I guess noirq is atomic context, late is nto?

noirq is *not* atomic, jus IRQs (non-wakeup) will be disabled (disbale_irq())

> 
> Dispc's suspend uses synchronize_irq(), so that rules out noirq. Although the call is not needed if using noirq version, so that could also be managed with small change. But I wonder if there's any benefit in using noirq versus late.




-- 
Best regards,
grygorii