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  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]
Date:   Tue, 5 Oct 2021 20:16:11 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <>
To:     Ulf Hansson <>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,
        Thierry Reding <>,
        Jonathan Hunter <>,
        Viresh Kumar <>,
        Stephen Boyd <>,
        Peter De Schrijver <>,
        Mikko Perttunen <>,
        Peter Chen <>,
        Lee Jones <>,
        Uwe Kleine-K├Ânig <>,
        Nishanth Menon <>,
        Adrian Hunter <>,
        Michael Turquette <>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,
        linux-tegra <>,
        Linux PM <>,
        Linux USB List <>,,,
        linux-mmc <>,
        dri-devel <>,
        DTML <>,
        linux-clk <>,
        Mark Brown <>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <>,
        Richard Weinberger <>,
        Miquel Raynal <>,
        Lucas Stach <>, Stefan Agner <>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <>,
        David Heidelberg <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 13/35] drm/tegra: gr2d: Support generic power domain
 and runtime PM

>> It's not a problem to change this patchset. The problem is that if
>> you'll grep mainline for 'pm_runtime_disable', you will find that there
>> are a lot of drivers in a potential trouble.
> Let's start by fixing this patchset, please - then we can consider
> what to do with the other cases separately.

Yeah, should be better to discuss it separately.

>>  void __pm_runtime_disable(struct device *dev, bool check_resume)
>>  {
>> +       flush_work(&dev->;
>> +
> What about the latency this may introduce? I am not sure that is
> acceptable here!?

I'm not aware about any code which relies on the original 'cancelling'
behaviour, perhaps Rafael should have more insight.

>> The sysfs rpm-forbid is a separate problem and it's less troublesome
>> since it requires root privileges. It's also not something that
>> userspace touches casually. For now I don't know what could be done
>> about it.
> As I said, the common method to address this problem is to run the
> following sequence:
> pm_runtime_get_sync()
> "power off the device"
> pm_runtime_disable()
> pm_runtime_put_noidle()
> This works even if user space, via sysfs, has triggered a call to
> pm_runtime_forbid(). Or doesn't it?
> If you don't like it, pm_runtime_force_suspend() should work too, at
> least for your cases, I believe.

I'll update the patches, thank you.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists