lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Nov]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUGFIX] PM: Fix active child counting when disabled and forbidden
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Huang Ying wrote:

> On Sun, 2012-11-04 at 20:56 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Mon, 5 Nov 2012, Huang Ying wrote:
> >
> > > In current runtime PM implementation, the active child count of the
> > > parent device may be decreased if the runtime PM of the child device
> > > is disabled and forbidden. For example, to unbind a PCI driver with a
> > > PCI device, the following code path is possible:
> > >
> > > pci_device_remove
> > > pm_runtime_set_suspended
> > > __pm_runtime_set_status
> > > atomic_add_unless(&parent->power.child_count, -1, 0)
> > >
> > > That is, the parent device may be suspended, even if the runtime PM of
> > > child device is forbidden to be suspended. This violate the rule that
> > > parent is allowed to be suspended only after all its children are
> > > suspended, and may cause issue.
> >
> > This doesn't sound like a correct description of the situation. The
> > rule is not violated. After pm_runtime_set_suspended runs, the child
> > _is_ suspended. Thus there's no reason not to allow the parent to be
> > suspended.
> >
> > The problem -- if there really is one -- is that a driver can put a
> > device into the suspended state by calling pm_runtime_disable followed
> > by pm_runtime_set_suspended, even if the usage count is > 0.
> >
> > I'm not so sure this should count as a problem. Generally devices
> > aren't disabled for runtime PM unless something is wrong.
>
> Devices will be disabled if the PCI driver is unbound from the PCI
> device.

Yes. But without a PCI driver, nothing will call
pm_runtime_set_suspended. And even if something does call
pm_runtime_set_suspended, it's still not a problem -- the device can't
be used without a driver.

> So I think the rule could be: even if the device is suspended, the
> device can be put into suspended state only if its usage count == 0. In
> this way, we can solve the issue for PCI driver unbound and that looks
> more reasonable.

You still have not shown that there really is a problem. Do you have
any particular use case in mind?

Alan Stern



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-11-06 17:06    [W:0.090 / U:0.824 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site