linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] remoteproc: Add device awake calls in rproc boot and shutdown path

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2025031704-awry-subsoil-2e4c@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 07:45:18 +0100
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Souradeep Chowdhury <quic_schowdhu@...cinc.com>
Cc: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
	linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] remoteproc: Add device awake calls in rproc boot and
 shutdown path

On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 12:08:03PM +0530, Souradeep Chowdhury wrote:
> Add device awake calls in case of rproc boot and rproc shutdown path.
> Currently, device awake call is only present in the recovery path
> of remoteproc. If a user stops and starts rproc by using the sysfs
> interface, then on pm suspension the firmware loading fails. Keep the
> device awake in such a case just like it is done for the recovery path.
> 
> Fixes: a781e5aa59110 ("remoteproc: core: Prevent system suspend during remoteproc recovery")
> Signed-off-by: Souradeep Chowdhury <quic_schowdhu@...cinc.com>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index c2cf0d277729..908a7b8f6c7e 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -1916,7 +1916,8 @@ int rproc_boot(struct rproc *rproc)
>  		pr_err("invalid rproc handle\n");
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
> -
> +
> +	pm_stay_awake(rproc->dev.parent);
>  	dev = &rproc->dev;
>  
>  	ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&rproc->lock);
> @@ -1961,6 +1962,7 @@ int rproc_boot(struct rproc *rproc)
>  		atomic_dec(&rproc->power);
>  unlock_mutex:
>  	mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
> +	pm_relax(rproc->dev.parent);
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_boot);
> @@ -1991,6 +1993,7 @@ int rproc_shutdown(struct rproc *rproc)
>  	struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
>  	int ret = 0;
>  
> +	pm_stay_awake(rproc->dev.parent);
>  	ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&rproc->lock);
>  	if (ret) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "can't lock rproc %s: %d\n", rproc->name, ret);
> @@ -2027,6 +2030,7 @@ int rproc_shutdown(struct rproc *rproc)
>  	rproc->table_ptr = NULL;
>  out:
>  	mutex_unlock(&rproc->lock);
> +	pm_relax(rproc->dev.parent);
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(rproc_shutdown);
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 
> 

Hi,

This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.  You have sent him
a patch that has triggered this response.  He used to manually respond
to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
created.  Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
kernel tree.

You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
as indicated below:

- This looks like a new version of a previously submitted patch, but you
  did not list below the --- line any changes from the previous version.
  Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the
  kernel file, Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what
  needs to be done here to properly describe this.

If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
from other developers.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot