Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 Nov 2013 15:32:09 -0500 | From | Santosh Shilimkar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] PM / Clocks: fix pm_clk_resume/suspend if CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME is set |
| |
+ Kevin and Rafiel,
On Wednesday 20 November 2013 03:11 PM, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > On 11/20/2013 09:53 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> On 11/20/13 11:06, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >>> On 11/20/2013 08:42 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: >>>> On 11/20/13 05:31, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >>>>> @@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ int pm_clk_suspend(struct device *dev) >>>>> list_for_each_entry_reverse(ce, &psd->clock_list, node) { >>>>> if (ce->status < PCE_STATUS_ERROR) { >>>>> if (ce->status == PCE_STATUS_ENABLED) >>>>> - clk_disable(ce->clk); >>>>> + clk_disable_unprepare(ce->clk); >>>>> ce->status = PCE_STATUS_ACQUIRED; >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>>> @@ -259,7 +259,7 @@ int pm_clk_resume(struct device *dev) >>>>> >>>>> list_for_each_entry(ce, &psd->clock_list, node) { >>>>> if (ce->status < PCE_STATUS_ERROR) { >>>>> - clk_enable(ce->clk); >>>>> + clk_prepare_enable(ce->clk); >>>>> ce->status = PCE_STATUS_ENABLED; >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>> This is inside a spin_lock_irqsave(). You should be getting scheduling >>>> while atomic warnings with this change. Are you testing with >>>> DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP=y? >>> Ops, thanks. No, It's not tested with DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP and >>> I agree with you. >>> I suspected this and thats what I was trying to mention off-list about sleeping inside locks.
>>> So, I see two option here: >>> 1) split above loops on two >>> 2) add calls of clk_prepare()/clk_unprepare() in pm_clk_notify() >>> >>> In my opinion option [2] is better. >>> >> >> Doesn't that mean the clock will always be prepared as long as the >> device is present? That doesn't sound good. I would like the clocks to >> be disabled and unprepared as long as the device is suspended. > > Yep ( > >> >> What is the lock protecting? The linked list or something more? Can we >> remove the locks? > > Looks like it's protecting linked list pm_clock_entry'es. > >> >> It looks like even if you just remove the locks here, the PM core is >> free to call this function with irqs disabled if pm_runtime_irq_safe() >> has been called on the device. Perhaps runtime PM can only do the >> clk_enable()/clk_disable() part and the clk_unprepare()/clk_prepare() >> calls should happen in the system suspend callbacks? > > Even don't know what to say :( On Keystone clk_unprepare()/clk_prepare() are NOPs. > But clk_prepare() has to be called at least once before clk_enable() :(( > So, solution with suspend/resume will not fix current problem :( unfortunately. > > FYI, Now pm_clk_suspend/pm_clk_resume are called from arch/arm/mach-keystone/pm_domain.c > (also similar solution is used by Davinci, but issue has not been detected because > PM runtime hasn't been used by Davinci IP drivers before) > One way to deal with this is to have clk_unprepare()/clk_prepare() called from dev_pm_domain ops before calling pm_clk_[suspend/resume]() if we can't have that as part of runtime code.
Kevin/Rafael might have better ideas here.
Regards, Santosh
| |