[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0000000000008d35ba05b216782a@google.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 09:01:05 +0000
From: <josephjang@...gle.com>
To: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
pavel@....cz, len.brown@...el.com, pmladek@...e.com,
sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com, rostedt@...dmis.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
jonglin@...gle.com, woodylin@...gle.com, markcheng@...gle.com,
josephjang@...gle.com
Subject: [PATCH] power: suspend: Add suspend timeout handler
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:15:38AM +0000, josephjang@...gle.com wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 02:22:26PM +0800, Joseph Jang wrote:
> > > > Add sleep timer and timeout handler to prevent device stuck during
> > > suspend/
> > > > resume process. The timeout handler will dump disk sleep task at
> first
> > > > round timeout and trigger kernel panic at second round timeout.
> > > > The default timer for each round is defined in
> > > > CONFIG_PM_SLEEP_TIMER_TIMEOUT.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Joseph Jang <josephjang@...gle.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > MAINTAINERS | 2 +
> > > > include/linux/console.h | 1 +
> > > > include/linux/suspend_timer.h | 90
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > > Why is this file in include/linux/ if you only ever call it from
> one .c
> > > file?
> >
> > I just refer to include/linux/suspend.h and create a new header file in
> the
> > same folder.
> > If you have a better location for the new header file, please feel free
> to
> > let me know.
> Only put .h files that are needed by different .c files in the
> include/linux/ directory. Otherwise it should be local to where the .c
> file is.
> Great, use that!
> > But we really hit the suspend hang issue that DPM_WATCHDOG cannot cover.
> What issue is that?
> > We propose a wide coverage debug feature like PM_SLEEP_MONITOR which
> > not only covers PM but also core PM hang issues.
> >
> > And DPM_WATCHDOG is for device driver power management in
> > drivers/base/power/main.c
> > and PM_SLEEP_MONITOR locate is for core power management in
> > kernel/power/suspend.c.
> > I think it is fine for users to select whether they need device PM only
> or
> > not.
> How will a user know which they should use?
> Why not just fix whatever is wrong with the watchdog code instead of
> creating a new one?
> > > And why isn't the watchdog sufficient for you? Why are you "open
> > > coding" a watchdog timer logic here at all???
> >
> > Yes, we refer to DPM_WATCHDOG to extend the watchdog debugging for core
> PM.
> > Because we really hit a real case that was not covered by DPM_WATCHDOG.
> Then fix that!
> > I think PM_SLEEP_MONITOR is an extension debug feature from
> DPM_WATCHDOG.
> Please just fix the watchdog, as obviously it is not working properly.
> Don't create something new because of that.
> thanks,
> greg k-h
Thank you Greq for promptly responding.
I am okay to fix the DPM_WATCHDOG feature, but would like to have quick
sync up before start.
Could you help?
1. Can we change the kernel config name ?
DPM_WATCHDOG stands for Device Power Management.
We propose PM_SLEEP_MONITOR is to cover Core PM and Device PM.
2. Can we create a new data structure instead of using the following struct
dpm_watchdog?
struct dpm_watchdog {
struct device *dev;
struct task_struct *tsk;
struct timer_list timer;
};
I list some reasons by following ...
static int device_resume(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state, bool async)
{
pm_callback_t callback = NULL;
const char *info = NULL;
int error = 0;
DECLARE_DPM_WATCHDOG_ON_STACK(wd); <== dpm_watchdog use stack memory for
watchdog timer struct, but sleep timer use global memory.
...<SNIP>
if (!dpm_wait_for_superior(dev, async))
goto Complete;
dpm_watchdog_set(&wd, dev); <== dpm_watchdog need "struct device", but
sleep timer doesn't need it.
device_lock(dev);
...<SNIP>
Unlock:
device_unlock(dev);
dpm_watchdog_clear(&wd);
Complete:
complete_all(&dev->power.completion);
TRACE_RESUME(error);
return error;
}
Thank you,
Joseph.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists