linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/13] soundwire: intel: reset pm

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: <20200817111924.GO2639@vkoul-mobl>
Date:   Mon, 17 Aug 2020 16:49:24 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To:     Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        tiwai@...e.de, broonie@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        jank@...ence.com, srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org,
        rander.wang@...ux.intel.com, ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com,
        hui.wang@...onical.com, pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com,
        sanyog.r.kale@...el.com, slawomir.blauciak@...el.com,
        mengdong.lin@...el.com, bard.liao@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/13] soundwire: intel: reset pm_runtime status during
 system resume

On 22-07-20, 04:37, Bard Liao wrote:
> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> The system resume does the entire bus re-initialization and brings it
> to full-power. If the device was pm_runtime suspended, there is no
> need to run the pm_runtime resume sequence after the system runtime.
> 
> Follow the documentation from runtime_pm.rst, and conditionally
> disable, set_active and re-enable the device on system resume.
> 
> Note that pm_runtime_suspended() is used instead of
> pm_runtime_status_suspended() so that we can deal with the case where
> pm_runtime is disabled.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/soundwire/intel.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
> index ed7163ae5f7a..284e5c9d240a 100644
> --- a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
> @@ -1433,6 +1433,14 @@ static int intel_suspend(struct device *dev)
>  		return 0;
>  	}
>  
> +	if (pm_runtime_suspended(dev)) {
> +		dev_dbg(dev,
> +			"%s: pm_runtime status: suspended\n",
> +			__func__);

first, can we have this in a single line, or better drop it
second why would this be called when device is suspended

> +
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
>  	ret = sdw_cdns_enable_interrupt(cdns, false);
>  	if (ret < 0) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "cannot disable interrupts on suspend\n");
> @@ -1493,6 +1501,18 @@ static int intel_resume(struct device *dev)
>  		return 0;
>  	}
>  
> +	if (pm_runtime_suspended(dev)) {
> +		dev_dbg(dev,
> +			"%s: pm_runtime status was suspended, forcing active\n",
> +			__func__);

this one also could look better in a single line

> +
> +		/* follow required sequence from runtime_pm.rst */
> +		pm_runtime_disable(dev);
> +		pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> +		pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(dev);
> +		pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> +	}
> +
>  	ret = intel_init(sdw);
>  	if (ret) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "%s failed: %d", __func__, ret);
> -- 
> 2.17.1

-- 
~Vinod