linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: power_control: Set SCMI_SYSPOWER

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250701150735.GD20538@nxa18884-linux>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 23:07:35 +0800
From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....nxp.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>, Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>,
	Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
	"arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org" <arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ranjani Vaidyanathan <ranjani.vaidyanathan@....com>,
	Chuck Cannon <chuck.cannon@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: power_control: Set
 SCMI_SYSPOWER_IDLE in pm resume

Hi Sudeep,

On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 10:58:07PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 11:21:52AM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 01:23:10AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > Just to summarise my understanding here at very high level, the issue
>>> > exists as the second notification by an agent to the Linux to suspend
>>> > the system wakes up the system from suspend state. Since the
>>> > interrupts are enabled before the thaw_processes() (which eventually
>>> > continues the execution of scmi_suspend_work_func() to set the state
>>> > to SCMI_SYSPOWER_IDLE, the scmi_userspace_notifier() is executed
>>> > much before and ends up ignoring the request as the state is still not
>>> > set to SCMI_SYSPOWER_IDLE. There is a race which your patch is
>>> > addressing.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for writing this down, It is very correct and clear.
>>> 
>>
>>While I am not against adding bus PM ops as it can be useful elsewhere,
>>just wonder if this usecase is a good use of it. Does setting the state
>>before the pm_suspend() call suffice. I still need to think through the
>>possible race with that solution, but just asking you to check if that
>
>There is race condition if setting the state to SCMI_SYSPOWER_IDLE before
>pm_suspend.
>
>The 2nd suspend notification could runs into pm_suspend again
>before pm_suspend update system_state to SYSTEM_SUSPEND, if my understanding
>is correct.
>
>Per pm_suspend->enter_state,
>"Make sure that no one else is trying to put the system into a sleep state",
>not sure, but I think better not let pm_suspend to handle the race condition.
>
>Since syspower only has one per system(linux), the other approach is to
>use syscore, but need a global variable for state in scmi_power_control.c,
>because syscore_suspend/resume does not have parameter.
>
>we need to set state back to IDLE after linux wakeup and before kernel
>thread scheduling. I only see two interfaces to achieve:
>PM ops or syscore ops.

Not sure you have time to give a look. I plan to post V2 later this
week. In V2, I would still use pm ops.

Thanks,
Peng

>
>Thanks,
>Peng
>
>
>>helps.
>>
>>-- 
>>Regards,
>>Sudeep