mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Zoran Markovic <zoran.markovic@linaro.org>
Cc: Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Benoit Goby <benoit@android.com>,
	Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>,
	Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@google.com>, San Mehat <san@google.com>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv2 1/2] drivers: power: Add watchdog timer to catch drivers which lockup during suspend/resume.
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 00:29:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4207662.oRJambEty7@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAME+o4mkBknj0jiUW=Z77fG1bJYy1jHF7=shNQ_ixeL_oJDjFg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wednesday, June 05, 2013 03:17:59 PM Zoran Markovic wrote:
> Rafael,

Hi,

> >>> We could do cancel_work_sync() as a recovery, but that call blocks until the
> >>> running async task is flushed, which might never happen. So doing a panic()
> >>> is pretty much the only option for recovering.
> >>
> >> Well, its usefulness is quite limited, then.  That said I'm still not convinced
> >> that this actually is the case.
> >
> > It does block in my environment, AFAICS. Looking a bit further in the
> > code, it looks like dpm_suspend() does an async_synchronize_full()
> > which would wait for all async tasks to complete. This is a
> > show-stopper because (under the circumstances) the assumption that
> > every async suspend routine eventually completes doesn't hold.
> >
> > We could possibly select which async tasks to wait for, but this would
> > add unnecessary complexity to a feature targeted for debugging. It
> > seems that this approach - although sounding reasonable - needs to
> > wait until we have a mechanism to cancel an async task.
> 
> Looks like the implementation of proposal for an async suspend +
> wait_for_completion_timeout is quite complex due to above limitations.
> How do we proceed from here? We have the following options:
> 1. Give up on the idea of having a suspend/resume watchdog.
> 2. Use the timer implementation (with possible modifications).
> 3. Wait for the implementation of (or implement) killing of an already
> running async work.
> 
> Are there any other ideas floating around?

I'm not aware of any at the moment, but I really don't think this is urgent.

I think we can revisit it during the 3.12 cycle and decide how to proceed
then.

Thanks,
Rafael


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

  reply	other threads:[~2013-06-05 22:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-05-10 21:28 [RFC PATCHv2 0/2] power: device suspend/resume watchdog Zoran Markovic
2013-05-10 21:28 ` [RFC PATCHv2 1/2] drivers: power: Add watchdog timer to catch drivers which lockup during suspend/resume Zoran Markovic
2013-05-11  6:13   ` Colin Cross
2013-05-12  0:39     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-05-12 19:15       ` Colin Cross
2013-05-13 11:26         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-05-28 18:26           ` Zoran Markovic
2013-05-28 20:49             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-05-31 21:13               ` Zoran Markovic
2013-06-05 22:17                 ` Zoran Markovic
2013-06-05 22:29                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2013-06-06 14:12                   ` Alan Stern
2013-06-10 21:25                     ` Colin Cross
2013-05-10 21:28 ` [RFC PATCHv2 2/2] PM: compile-time configuration of device suspend/resume watchdogs Zoran Markovic
2013-05-11  6:23   ` Colin Cross
2013-05-13 16:03     ` John Stultz
2013-05-11  9:28   ` Pavel Machek
2013-05-11 22:21     ` Colin Cross
2013-05-12  0:05       ` Pavel Machek

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4207662.oRJambEty7@vostro.rjw.lan \
    --to=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=benoit@android.com \
    --cc=ccross@android.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=san@google.com \
    --cc=toddpoynor@google.com \
    --cc=zoran.markovic@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®