| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFo5V8WfcJaZfRAVg6RteTTRDP=uv7SnO4xmE3bdV3rHLg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2022 17:09:46 +0200
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Aswath Govindraju <a-govindraju@...com>
Cc: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mmc: sdhci_am654: Add support for PM suspend/resume
On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 at 14:24, Aswath Govindraju <a-govindraju@...com> wrote:
>
> Hi Uffe,
>
> On 07/04/22 16:12, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > + Faiz
> >
> > On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 at 09:53, Aswath Govindraju <a-govindraju@...com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Add support for suspend/resume and pm_runtime resume/suspend.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Aswath Govindraju <a-govindraju@...com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c | 204 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> >> 1 file changed, 191 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c
> >> index e54fe24d47e7..e86df72dfd78 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c
> >> @@ -84,6 +84,7 @@
> >> #define DRIVER_STRENGTH_40_OHM 0x4
> >>
> >> #define CLOCK_TOO_SLOW_HZ 50000000
> >> +#define SDHCI_AM654_AUTOSUSPEND_DELAY 100
> >>
> >> /* Command Queue Host Controller Interface Base address */
> >> #define SDHCI_AM654_CQE_BASE_ADDR 0x200
> >> @@ -791,16 +792,10 @@ static int sdhci_am654_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>
> >> pltfm_host->clk = clk_xin;
> >>
> >> - /* Clocks are enabled using pm_runtime */
> >> - pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> >> - ret = pm_runtime_resume_and_get(dev);
> >> - if (ret)
> >> - goto pm_runtime_disable;
> >> -
> >> base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 1);
> >> if (IS_ERR(base)) {
> >> ret = PTR_ERR(base);
> >> - goto pm_runtime_put;
> >> + goto err_pltfm_free;
> >> }
> >>
> >> sdhci_am654->base = devm_regmap_init_mmio(dev, base,
> >> @@ -808,30 +803,42 @@ static int sdhci_am654_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> if (IS_ERR(sdhci_am654->base)) {
> >> dev_err(dev, "Failed to initialize regmap\n");
> >> ret = PTR_ERR(sdhci_am654->base);
> >> - goto pm_runtime_put;
> >> + goto err_pltfm_free;
> >> }
> >>
> >> ret = sdhci_am654_get_of_property(pdev, sdhci_am654);
> >> if (ret)
> >> - goto pm_runtime_put;
> >> + goto err_pltfm_free;
> >>
> >> ret = mmc_of_parse(host->mmc);
> >> if (ret) {
> >> dev_err(dev, "parsing dt failed (%d)\n", ret);
> >> - goto pm_runtime_put;
> >> + goto err_pltfm_free;
> >> }
> >>
> >> host->mmc_host_ops.execute_tuning = sdhci_am654_execute_tuning;
> >>
> >> + pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> >> + pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> >> + clk_prepare_enable(pltfm_host->clk);
> >
> > I think some error handling is missing, at least for clk_prepare_enable().
> >
> >> + ret = pm_runtime_resume_and_get(dev);
> >
> > This can be replaced with a pm_runtime_get_noresume() - and I think it
> > would improve the readability of the code, to put the call above
> > pm_runtime_set_active().
> >
>
> Shouldn't pm_runtime_get_* be only done after we execute
> pm_runtime_enable and pm_runtime_set_active should be called before
> pm_runtime_enable()
pm_runtime_get_noresume() is somewhat special in this regard. It only
bumps the usage count, which is to prevent any following attempts from
runtime suspending the device.
It's perfectly okay to call it, both before and after runtime PM has
been enabled.
>
> "In addition to that, the initial runtime PM status of all devices is
> ‘suspended’, but it need not reflect the actual physical state of the
> device. Thus, if the device is initially active (i.e. it is able to
> process I/O), its runtime PM status must be changed to ‘active’, with
> the help of pm_runtime_set_active(), before pm_runtime_enable() is
> called for the device." [1]
>
>
> Yeah, and I agree that pm_runtime_get_noresume would be better to use
> over here.
Great!
>
> [1] - https://www.infradead.org/~mchehab/kernel_docs/power/runtime_pm.html
>
>
> >> + if (ret)
> >> + goto clk_disable;
> >> +
> >> ret = sdhci_am654_init(host);
> >> if (ret)
> >> - goto pm_runtime_put;
> >> + goto clk_disable;
> >>
> >> + /* Setting up autosuspend */
> >> + pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(dev, SDHCI_AM654_AUTOSUSPEND_DELAY);
> >> + pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(dev);
> >> + pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(dev);
> >> + pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(dev);
> >> return 0;
> >>
> >> -pm_runtime_put:
> >> +clk_disable:
> >> + clk_disable_unprepare(pltfm_host->clk);
> >> pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
> >> -pm_runtime_disable:
> >> pm_runtime_disable(dev);
> >> err_pltfm_free:
> >> sdhci_pltfm_free(pdev);
> >> @@ -841,6 +848,7 @@ static int sdhci_am654_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> static int sdhci_am654_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> {
> >> struct sdhci_host *host = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> >> + struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
> >> int ret;
> >>
> >> sdhci_remove_host(host, true);
> >> @@ -848,16 +856,186 @@ static int sdhci_am654_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> if (ret < 0)
> >> return ret;
> >>
> >> + clk_disable_unprepare(pltfm_host->clk);
> >
> > To gate the clock, you need to make sure it has been ungated first. As
> > you anyway need to add a call pm_runtime_get_sync() prior to calling
> > sdhci_remove_host() a few lines above, this would fix it.
> >
>
> This call was the counter part for the clk_enable_prepare called in
> probe(). Yes, and I should have done a pm_runtime_get_sync before
> calling sdhci_remove_host() in sdhci_am654_remove()
>
> > Moreover, the existing call to pm_runtime_put_sync() a few lines above
> > in sdhci_am654_remove(), should be replaced with a call to
> > pm_runtime_put_noidle() - and that call should be made below the call
> > pm_runtime_disable() to become correct.
>
> Again shouldn't we disable pm_runtime after putting the device?
pm_runtime_put_noidle() is special in this regard, it only decreases
the usage count and doesn't try to runtime suspend the device.
It's perfectly okay to call it, both before and after runtime PM has
been enabled.
>
> >
> >> pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
> >> sdhci_pltfm_free(pdev);
> >> + return 0;
> >> +}
[...]
Kind regards
Uffe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists