[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2024020600-attendant-verbally-6441@gregkh>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 09:44:30 +0000
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...wei.com>
Cc: jirislaby@...nel.org, tony@...mide.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, john.ogness@...utronix.de,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
yangyicong@...ilicon.com, linuxarm@...wei.com,
prime.zeng@...ilicon.com, jonathan.cameron@...wei.com,
fanghao11@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] serial: port: Don't suspend if the port is still busy
On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 03:33:22PM +0800, Yicong Yang wrote:
> From: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>
>
> We accidently met the issue that the bash prompt is not shown after the
> previous command done and until the next input if there's only one CPU
> (In our issue other CPUs are isolated by isolcpus=). Further analysis
> shows it's because the port entering runtime suspend even if there's
> still pending chars in the buffer and the pending chars will only be
> processed in next device resuming. We are using amba-pl011 and the
> problematic flow is like below:
>
> Bash kworker
> tty_write()
> file_tty_write()
> n_tty_write()
> uart_write()
> __uart_start()
> pm_runtime_get() // wakeup waker
> queue_work()
> pm_runtime_work()
> rpm_resume()
> status = RPM_RESUMING
> serial_port_runtime_resume()
> port->ops->start_tx()
> pl011_tx_chars()
> uart_write_wakeup()
> […]
> __uart_start()
> pm_runtime_get() < 0 // because runtime status = RPM_RESUMING
> // later data are not commit to the port driver
> status = RPM_ACTIVE
> rpm_idle() -> rpm_suspend()
>
> This patch tries to fix this by checking the port busy before entering
> runtime suspending. A runtime_suspend callback is added for the port
> driver. When entering runtime suspend the callback is invoked, if there's
> still pending chars in the buffer then flush the buffer.
>
> Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...ilicon.com>
Is this a regression that was caused by the port code? If so, what
commit id does this fix? Should it be backported to older kernels?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists