linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v1 1/1] scsi: pm: Leave runtime resume along if block layer PM is enabled

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: <cd1ae6b2740a0211efe7e602691fd5e4@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Mon, 16 Nov 2020 09:19:49 +0800
From:   Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc:     asutoshd@...eaurora.org, nguyenb@...eaurora.org,
        hongwus@...eaurora.org, ziqichen@...eaurora.org,
        rnayak@...eaurora.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...roid.com, saravanak@...gle.com, salyzyn@...gle.com,
        Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v1 1/1] scsi: pm: Leave runtime resume along if block
 layer PM is enabled

Hi Bart,

On 2020-11-15 04:57, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 11/12/20 10:30 PM, Can Guo wrote:
>> If block layer runtime PM is enabled for one SCSI device, then there 
>> is
>> no need to forcibly change the SCSI device and its request queue's 
>> runtime
>> PM status to active in scsi_dev_type_resume(), since block layer PM 
>> shall
>> resume the SCSI device on the demand of bios.
> 
> Please change "along" into "alone" in the subject of this patch (if 
> that
> is what you meant).
> 

Aha, sorry, a typo here.

>> +	if (scsi_is_sdev_device(dev)) {
>> +		struct scsi_device *sdev;
>> 
>> +		sdev = to_scsi_device(dev);
> 
> A minor comment: I think that "struct scsi_device *sdev =
> to_scsi_device(dev);" fits on a single line.
> 

Sure.

>> +		 * If block layer runtime PM is enabled for the SCSI device,
>> +		 * let block layer PM handle its runtime PM routines.
> 
> Please change "its runtime PM routines" into "runtime resume" or
> similar. I think that will make the comment more clear.
> 

Yes, thanks.

>> +		if (sdev->request_queue->dev)
>> +			return err;
>> +	}
> 
> The 'dev' member only exists in struct request_queue if CONFIG_PM=y so
> the above won't compile if CONFIG_PM=n. How about adding a function in
> include/linux/blk-pm.h to check whether or not runtime PM has been 
> enabled?
> 

You are right.

> Otherwise this patch looks good to me.

Actually, I am thinking about removing all the pm_runtime_set_active()
codes in both scsi_bus_resume_common() and scsi_dev_type_resume() - we
don't need to forcibly set the runtime PM status to RPM_ACTIVE for 
either
SCSI host/target or SCSI devices.

Whenever we access one SCSI device, either block layer or somewhere in
the path (e.g. throgh sg IOCTL, sg_open() calls 
scsi_autopm_get_device())
should runtime resume the device first, and the runtime PM framework 
makes
sure device's gets resumed as well. Thus, the pm_runtime_set_active() 
seems
redundant. What do you think?

Thanks,

Can Guo.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.