lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/4 v5] memstick: Prevent memstick host from getting runtime suspended during card detection
From
Date


> On Oct 31, 2018, at 12:04 AM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 30 October 2018 at 16:23, Kai Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 30, 2018, at 21:03, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 29 October 2018 at 17:31, Kai Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 29, 2018, at 20:25, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 24 October 2018 at 10:49, Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>> We can use MEMSTICK_POWER_{ON,OFF} along with pm_runtime_{get,put}
>>>>>> helpers to let memstick host support runtime pm.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's a small window between memstick_detect_change() and its queued
>>>>>> work, memstick_check(). In this window the rpm count may go down to zero
>>>>>> before the memstick host powers on, so the host can be inadvertently
>>>>>> suspended.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Increment rpm count before calling memstick_check(), and decrement rpm
>>>>>> count afterward, as now we are sure the memstick host should be
>>>>>> suspended or not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/memstick/core/memstick.c | 4 ++++
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/memstick/core/memstick.c b/drivers/memstick/core/memstick.c
>>>>>> index 76382c858c35..5f16a8826401 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/memstick/core/memstick.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/memstick/core/memstick.c
>>>>>> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
>>>>>> #include <linux/delay.h>
>>>>>> #include <linux/slab.h>
>>>>>> #include <linux/module.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #define DRIVER_NAME "memstick"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -209,6 +210,7 @@ static int memstick_dummy_check(struct memstick_dev *card)
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> void memstick_detect_change(struct memstick_host *host)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> + pm_runtime_get_noresume(host->dev.parent);
>>>>>> queue_work(workqueue, &host->media_checker);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(memstick_detect_change);
>>>>>> @@ -479,6 +481,8 @@ static void memstick_check(struct work_struct *work)
>>>>>> host->set_param(host, MEMSTICK_POWER, MEMSTICK_POWER_OFF);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mutex_unlock(&host->lock);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + pm_runtime_put(host->dev.parent);
>>>>>> dev_dbg(&host->dev, "memstick_check finished\n");
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure this works, sorry.
>>>>>
>>>>> More precisely, I don't think there is a guarantee that the calls to
>>>>> pm_runtime_get|put*() becomes properly balanced. In principle
>>>>> memstick_detect_change() could be called, without actually causing a
>>>>> new work to be scheduled if there is already such a work in the queue
>>>>> (depends on the workqueue configuration). Isn't it so?
>>>>
>>>> You are right.
>>>>
>>>> We can use test_and_set_bit() or alike to properly balance pm_runtime
>>>> helpers, but the most straightforward solution in my mind is to merge
>>>> memstick_detect_change() and memstick_check() as one function.
>>>>
>>>> memstick_detect_change() it’s the only user of memstick_check() anyway.
>>>
>>> I suspect memstick_detect_change() is supposed to be called by host
>>> drivers, when they receive some kind of notification due to a card
>>> being inserted or removed. I guess that happen (at least
>>> hypothetically) also from atomic (IRQ) context.
>>>
>>> As memstick_check() is doing hole bunch of operations, I am not sure
>>> bypassing the work-queue is a good idea, if that is what you are
>>> proposing.
>>
>> Okay, it’s better to keep it that way.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Or is there a better way in your mind?
>>>
>>> I don't know.
>>>
>>> Well, I am not sure I understand why you need to call
>>> pm_runtime_get_noresume() from memstick_detect_change() in the first
>>> place. Could you explain that in more detail?
>>
>> I guess it didn’t explain it well enough in the log, let me add some detail:
>> There's a small window between memstick_detect_change() and its queued
>> work, memstick_check(). In this window the rpm count may go down to zero
>> before the memstick host powers on, where I use
>> pm_runtime_get_noresume() to increment the rpm count.
>>
>> memstick_check() uses some functions in rtsx_usb_ms that have
>> pm_runtime_put*() so the rpm count may go down to zero, before the
>> memstick host powers on.
>
> So then, why doesn't memstick_check() early on calls
> pm_runtime_get_sync() and when it has finished with probing for a
> card, balance that with a call pm_runtime_put()?

This will do, not sure what I was thinking. Thanks for pointing out.

Kai-Heng

>
> Kind regards
> Uffe

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-31 07:34    [W:0.049 / U:0.548 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site