mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
To: Alexander Usyskin <alexander.usyskin@intel.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Menachem Adin <menachem.adin@intel.com>,
	 "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Todd Brandt <todd.e.brandt@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [char-misc v3] mei: me: reduce the scope on unexpected reset
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 15:43:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0hvf_q=g-PzerYnqZBjnDEsnnA405ZnD-BumPJG56HHoA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260326145720.3937252-1-alexander.usyskin@intel.com>

On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 4:14 PM Alexander Usyskin
<alexander.usyskin@intel.com> wrote:
>
> After commit 2cedb296988c ("mei: me: trigger link reset if hw ready is unexpected")
> some devices started to show long resume times (5-7 seconds).
> This happens as mei falsely detects unready hardware,
> starts parallel link reset flow and triggers link reset timeouts
> in the resume callback.
>
> Address it by performing detection of unready hardware only
> when driver is in the ENABLED state instead of blacklisting
> states as done in the original patch.
>
> Reported-by: Todd Brandt <todd.e.brandt@linux.intel.com>
> Closes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=221023
> Tested-by: Todd Brandt <todd.e.brandt@linux.intel.com>
> Fixes: 2cedb296988c ("mei: me: trigger link reset if hw ready is unexpected")
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Usyskin <alexander.usyskin@intel.com>
> ---
>
> V3: reword commit message, add Rafael and PM list
>
> V2: rebase over v7.0-rc4
>
>  drivers/misc/mei/hw-me.c | 14 ++++----------
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/mei/hw-me.c b/drivers/misc/mei/hw-me.c
> index d4612c659784..1e4a41ac428f 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/mei/hw-me.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/mei/hw-me.c
> @@ -1337,19 +1337,13 @@ irqreturn_t mei_me_irq_thread_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
>         /*  check if we need to start the dev */
>         if (!mei_host_is_ready(dev)) {
>                 if (mei_hw_is_ready(dev)) {
> -                       /* synchronized by dev mutex */

I think that the comment above is still valid, isn't it?  If so, why remove it?

> -                       if (waitqueue_active(&dev->wait_hw_ready)) {
> -                               dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "we need to start the dev.\n");
> -                               dev->recvd_hw_ready = true;
> -                               wake_up(&dev->wait_hw_ready);
> -                       } else if (dev->dev_state != MEI_DEV_UNINITIALIZED &&
> -                                  dev->dev_state != MEI_DEV_POWERING_DOWN &&
> -                                  dev->dev_state != MEI_DEV_POWER_DOWN) {
> +                       if (dev->dev_state == MEI_DEV_ENABLED) {
>                                 dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "Force link reset.\n");
>                                 schedule_work(&dev->reset_work);
>                         } else {

Isn't the waitqueue_active() check needed any more?

> -                               dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "Ignore this interrupt in state = %d\n",
> -                                       dev->dev_state);
> +                               dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "we need to start the dev.\n");
> +                               dev->recvd_hw_ready = true;
> +                               wake_up(&dev->wait_hw_ready);
>                         }
>                 } else {
>                         dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "Spurious Interrupt\n");
> --

  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-27 14:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-26 14:57 Alexander Usyskin
2026-03-27 14:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2026-03-29 14:30   ` Usyskin, Alexander
2026-03-29 16:13     ` Rafael J. Wysocki

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='CAJZ5v0hvf_q=g-PzerYnqZBjnDEsnnA405ZnD-BumPJG56HHoA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.usyskin@intel.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=menachem.adin@intel.com \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=todd.e.brandt@linux.intel.com \
    /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