Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 5 Jan 2023 21:59:27 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] coresight: cti: Add PM runtime call in enable_store | From | Jinlong Mao <> |
| |
On 1/5/2023 9:55 PM, James Clark wrote: > > On 04/01/2023 13:11, James Clark wrote: >> >> On 24/12/2022 14:17, Mao Jinlong wrote: >>> In commit 6746eae4bbad ("coresight: cti: Fix hang in cti_disable_hw()") >>> PM runtime calls are removed from cti_enable_hw/cti_disable_hw. When >>> enabling CTI by writing enable sysfs node, clock for accessing CTI >>> register won't be enabled. Device will crash due to register access >>> issue. Add PM runtime call in enable_store to fix this issue. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Mao Jinlong <quic_jinlmao@quicinc.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-sysfs.c | 11 +++++++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-sysfs.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-sysfs.c >>> index 6d59c815ecf5..b1ed424ae043 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-sysfs.c >>> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-sysfs.c >>> @@ -108,10 +108,17 @@ static ssize_t enable_store(struct device *dev, >>> if (ret) >>> return ret; >>> >>> - if (val) >>> + if (val) { >>> + ret = pm_runtime_resume_and_get(dev->parent); >>> + if (ret) >>> + return ret; >>> ret = cti_enable(drvdata->csdev); >>> - else >>> + if (ret) >>> + pm_runtime_put(dev->parent); >>> + } else { >>> ret = cti_disable(drvdata->csdev); >>> + pm_runtime_put(dev->parent); >> Hi Jinlong, >> >> This new pm_runtime_put() causes this when writing 0 to enable: >> >> [ 483.253814] coresight-cti 23020000.cti: Runtime PM usage count >> underflow! >> >> Maybe we can modify cti_disable_hw() to return a value to indicate that >> the disable actually happened, and only then call pm_runtime_put(). >> >> I suppose you could also check in the store function if it was already >> enabled first, but then I don't know what kind of locking that would >> need? cti_disable_hw() already seems to have a couple of locks, so maybe >> the return value solution is easiest. >> > We've also just seen another issue where multiple calls to > cti_disable_hw() can cause enable_req_count to go negative. I'm going to > work on a few fixes (including yours) to make sure that it's complete > and post it shortly. Ok, Thank you, James. > > James
| |