From: Maulik Shah <mkshah@codeaurora.org>
To: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
Cc: evgreen@chromium.org, mka@chromium.org, swboyd@chromium.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Correctly ignore CPU_CLUSTER_PM notifications
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 10:49:24 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e8310c51-d7b1-ac88-cd6b-0965804eb754@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200424094610.v5.1.Ic7096b3b9b7828cdd41cd5469a6dee5eb6abf549@changeid>
Hi,
On 4/24/2020 10:16 PM, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> Our switch statement doesn't have entries for CPU_CLUSTER_PM_ENTER,
> CPU_CLUSTER_PM_ENTER_FAILED, and CPU_CLUSTER_PM_EXIT and doesn't have
> a default. This means that we'll try to do a flush in those cases but
> we won't necessarily be the last CPU down. That's not so ideal since
> our (lack of) locking assumes we're on the last CPU.
>
> Luckily this isn't as big a problem as you'd think since (at least on
> the SoC I tested) we don't get these notifications except on full
> system suspend. ...and on full system suspend we get them on the last
> CPU down. That means that the worst problem we hit is flushing twice.
> Still, it's good to make it correct.
>
> Fixes: 985427f997b6 ("soc: qcom: rpmh: Invoke rpmh_flush() for dirty caches")
> Reported-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
> Reviewed-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@codeaurora.org>
> Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
> ---
>
> Changes in v5:
> - Corrently => Correctly
>
> Changes in v4:
> - ("...Corrently ignore CPU_CLUSTER_PM notifications") split out for v4.
>
> Changes in v3: None
> Changes in v2: None
>
> drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c
> index a9e15699f55f..3571a99fc839 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c
> @@ -806,6 +806,8 @@ static int rpmh_rsc_cpu_pm_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb,
> case CPU_PM_EXIT:
> cpumask_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &drv->cpus_entered_pm);
> goto exit;
> + default:
> + return NOTIFY_DONE;
I noticed a bug here,
Either need to unlock and return here.
+ default:
+ ret = NOTIFY_DONE;
+ goto exit;
Or
If you move this patch at the end of series, it should will work fine as is.
Since in patch 5 of this series, pm_lock is removed, so return
NOTIFY_DONE; do not any unlock.
When i pulled in only first two changes in this series i got spinlock
recursion during suspend-resume.
Back when i pull in entire series for validation, the issue do not come
because last patch removes pm_lock.
Thanks,
Maulik
> }
>
> ret = rpmh_rsc_ctrlr_is_busy(drv);
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-04 5:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-24 16:46 Douglas Anderson
2020-04-24 16:46 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: We aren't notified of our own failure w/ NOTIFY_BAD Douglas Anderson
2020-04-24 16:46 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] kernel/cpu_pm: Fix uninitted local in cpu_pm Douglas Anderson
2020-04-30 21:15 ` Doug Anderson
2020-04-24 16:46 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Simplify locking by eliminating the per-TCS lock Douglas Anderson
2020-04-24 17:30 ` Stephen Boyd
2020-04-24 18:06 ` Stephen Boyd
2020-04-24 18:28 ` Stephen Boyd
2020-04-24 16:46 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Remove the pm_lock Douglas Anderson
2020-05-04 5:19 ` Maulik Shah [this message]
2020-05-04 17:54 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Correctly ignore CPU_CLUSTER_PM notifications Doug Anderson
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=e8310c51-d7b1-ac88-cd6b-0965804eb754@codeaurora.org \
--to=mkshah@codeaurora.org \
--cc=agross@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=evgreen@chromium.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mka@chromium.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=swboyd@chromium.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®