[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFooeseEXW-O8DCAd5Jku1n0iNXfHFt_HVjcfMYFvw4a2g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2021 12:18:12 +0200
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Maulik Shah <mkshah@...eaurora.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PM: sleep: Fix runtime PM based cpuidle support
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 21:56, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 21:02, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 8:12 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 18:33, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 6:17 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > [cut]
> >
> > > > So in theory you could check the pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend() return
> > > > value and fall back to something like WFI if that's an error code.
> > >
> > > I have already tried that, but it simply got too complicated. The main
> > > issue was that runtime PM could become disabled for the device in the
> > > middle of executing the ->enter() callback.
> >
> > So IIUC the problem is that you cannot resume after suspending in that case.
> >
> > IOW, you need to guarantee that if the suspend is successful, the
> > resume also will take place, but if the suspend fails, you basically
> > don't care.
>
> Exactly.
>
> >
> > > For example, if pm_runtime_get_sync() fails, I still need to make sure
> > > the reference counting in genpd becomes correct - and I can't do that
> > > using dev_pm_genpd_resume(). That's because it's not designed to be
> > > called in this "unknown" suspend phase, but should be called after the
> > > noirq phase and be properly balanced with dev_pm_genpd_suspend().
> > >
> > > In other words, the error path didn't work out for me.
> >
> > It should be sufficient to call wake_up_all_idle_cpus() in the suspend
> > path before dpm_suspend_late(), because system suspend acquires a
> > PM-runtime reference on every device. IOW, it won't let any devices
> > runtime-suspend, so if your power domain devices are resumed in that
> > path, they will never suspend again in it and the
> > pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend() in __psci_enter_domain_idle_state()
> > becomes a reference counter management call which works regardless of
> > whether or not PM runtime is disabled.
>
> That sounds like a great idea, this should work too! Then the question
> is, how to make that call to wake_up_all_idle_cpus() to become
> optional - or only invoked for the cpuidle drivers that need it.
>
> In any case, I will try this out, thanks for the suggestion!
I now recall that I have already tried this, but unfortunately it doesn't work.
The problem is that the dev->power.syscore flag is set for the device,
which makes device_prepare() to bail out early and skip calling
pm_runtime_get_noresume().
Kind regards
Uffe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists