lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] PM / sleep: New flag to speed up suspend-resume of suspended devices
Date
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 01:59:36 PM Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 17 February 2014 00:50, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >
> > Currently, some subsystems (e.g. PCI and the ACPI PM domain) have to
> > resume all runtime-suspended devices during system suspend, mostly
> > because those devices may need to be reprogrammed due to different
> > wakeup settings for system sleep and for runtime PM. However, at
> > least in some cases, that isn't really necessary, because the wakeup
> > settings may not be really different.
> >
> > The idea here is that subsystems should know whether or not it is
> > necessary to reprogram a given device during system suspend and they
> > should be able to tell the PM core about that. For this reason,
> > modify the PM core so that if the .prepare() callback returns a
> > positive value for certain device, the core will set a new
> > power.fast_suspend flag for it. Then, if that flag is set, the core
> > will skip all of the subsequent suspend callbacks for that device.
> > It also will skip all of the system resume callbacks for the device
> > during the subsequent system resume and pm_request_resume() will be
> > executed to trigger a runtime PM resume of the device after the
> > system device resume sequence has been finished.
> >
> > However, since parents may need to be resumed so that their children
> > can be reprogrammed, make the PM core clear power.fast_suspend for
> > devices whose children don't have power.fast_suspend set (the
> > power.ignore_children flag doesn't matter here, because a parent
> > whose children are normally ignored for runtime PM may still need to
> > be accessible for their children to be prepare for system suspend
> > properly).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/base/power/main.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> > include/linux/pm.h | 1
> > 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: linux-pm/drivers/base/power/main.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/base/power/main.c
> > +++ linux-pm/drivers/base/power/main.c
> > @@ -478,7 +478,7 @@ static int device_resume_noirq(struct de
> > TRACE_DEVICE(dev);
> > TRACE_RESUME(0);
> >
> > - if (dev->power.syscore)
> > + if (dev->power.syscore || dev->power.fast_suspend)
> > goto Out;
> >
> > if (!dev->power.is_noirq_suspended)
> > @@ -599,7 +599,7 @@ static int device_resume_early(struct de
> > TRACE_DEVICE(dev);
> > TRACE_RESUME(0);
> >
> > - if (dev->power.syscore)
> > + if (dev->power.syscore || dev->power.fast_suspend)
> > goto Out;
> >
> > if (!dev->power.is_late_suspended)
> > @@ -724,6 +724,11 @@ static int device_resume(struct device *
> > if (dev->power.syscore)
> > goto Complete;
> >
> > + if (dev->power.fast_suspend) {
> > + pm_request_resume(dev);
> > + goto Complete;
>
> So, this will trigger an async request to runtime resume the device.
>
> At device_complete(), we do pm_runtime_put() to return the reference
> we fetched at device_prepare(), thus likely causing the device to be
> runtime suspended again. Is that the expected sequence you need? Could
> you elaborate why?

That pm_runtime_put() will not cause the device to be re-suspended,
because it will be executed before the resume scheduled by the
pm_request_resume() above.

Thanks!

--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-18 15:01    [W:0.085 / U:0.820 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site