Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1350312
| From | Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended |
| Date | 2016-03-04 16:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r8ZPY-bV-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <r8Vjj-5hs-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Fri, 4 Mar 2016, Ulf Hansson wrote: > + Alan > > On 3 March 2016 at 21:16, Laurent Pinchart > <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > > The pm_runtime_force_suspend() and pm_runtime_force_resume() helpers are > > designed to help driver being RPM-centric by offering an easy way to > > manager runtime PM state during system suspend and resume. The first > > function will force the device into runtime suspend at system suspend > > time, while the second one will perform the reverse operation at system > > resume time. > > > > However, the pm_runtime_force_resume() really forces resume, regarding > > of whether the device was running or already suspended before the call > > to pm_runtime_force_suspend(). This results in devices being runtime > > resumed at system resume time when they shouldn't. > > > > Fix this by recording whether the device has been forcefully suspended > > in pm_runtime_force_suspend() and condition resume in > > pm_runtime_force_resume() to that state. > > > > All current users of pm_runtime_force_resume() call the function > > uncontionally in their system resume handler (some actually set it as > > the resume handler), all after calling pm_runtime_force_suspend() at > > system suspend time. The change in behaviour should thus be safe. > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> > > @@ -1475,6 +1476,7 @@ int pm_runtime_force_suspend(struct device *dev) > > goto err; > > > > pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev); > > + dev->power.is_force_suspended = true; > > return 0; > > err: > > pm_runtime_enable(dev); > > @@ -1510,6 +1515,7 @@ int pm_runtime_force_resume(struct device *dev) > > if (ret) > > goto out; > > > > + dev->power.is_force_suspended = false; > > pm_runtime_set_active(dev); > > pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(dev); > > out: Setting a bitflag is not SMP-safe. When you write to one of the runtime-PM bits under dev->power, it is necessary to hold dev->power.lock. > Overall I have no objections to this change, as I think it's improving > the behaviour! > > What I was thinking though, but it might be a bit controversial. :-)... > Instead of relying on whether we actually forced runtime suspend > earlier, why couldn't we instead check the runtime PM usage count of > the device? > > Only when it's greater than zero, we shall do the forced resume of the > device, otherwise just re-enable runtime PM. > > This would have the affect of leaving devices in runtime suspend, > until they really needs to be used again. It would thus decrease the > total system PM resume time. > > Do you think this could work? If you do this then there would be no need for is_force_suspended. It seems like a good idea to me. Alan Stern
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> - 2016-03-03 21:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com> - 2016-03-03 21:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> - 2016-03-03 21:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com> - 2016-03-03 22:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> - 2016-03-04 11:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-03-04 16:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> - 2016-03-04 22:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> - 2016-03-06 16:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2016-03-06 18:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> - 2016-03-07 11:20 +0100
csiph-web