i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
Subsystems (8)
PATCH 1/1 i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
When runtime PM is enabled, each OMAP i2c device is suspended after each i2c xfer. However, there are two cases when the static suspend methods must be used to ensure the devices are suspended:
1) runtime PM is disabled, either at compile time or dynamically
via /sys/devices/.../power/control.
2) an i2c client driver uses i2c during it's suspend callback, thus leaving the i2c driver active (NOTE: runtime suspend transitions are disabled during system suspend, so i2c activity during system suspend will runtime resume the device, but not runtime (re)suspend it.)
Since the actual work to suspend the device is handled by the subsytem, call the bus methods to take care of it.
NOTE: This takes care of a known suspend problem on OMAP3 where the TWL RTC driver does i2c xfers during its suspend path leaving the i2c driver in an active state (since runtime suspend transistions are disabled.)
---
Ben, this is a regression in 2.6.38 so hopefully this can be queued in the 2.6.38-rc cycle. Thanks.
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c +28 -0
@@ -1137,12 +1137,40 @@ omap_i2c_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)return 0 ; } +#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND +static int omap_i2c_suspend (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) +if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm && dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend) + dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend (dev); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int omap_i2c_resume (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) +if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm && dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume) + dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume (dev); + +return 0 ; +} + +static struct dev_pm_ops omap_i2c_pm_ops = { + .suspend = omap_i2c_suspend, + .resume = omap_i2c_resume, +}; +#else +#define omap_i2c_pm_ops NULL +#endif +static struct platform_driver omap_i2c_driver = { .probe = omap_i2c_probe, .remove = omap_i2c_remove, .driver = { .name ="omap_i2c" , .owner =THIS_MODULE , + .pm = &omap_i2c_pm_ops, }, };
Signature · 1 line
1.7.3.5
PATCH 1/1 i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
Hi Kevin,
Quoted 5 lines
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:khilman at ti.com]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 5:49 AM
To: Ben Dooks; Rajendra Nayak; linux-i2c at vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-omap at vger.kernel.org; linux-pm at lists.linux-foundation.org;
linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
Quoted 6 lines
Subject: [PATCH] i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
When runtime PM is enabled, each OMAP i2c device is suspended after each i2c xfer. However, there are two cases when the static suspend methods must be used to ensure the devices are suspended:
Quoted 6 lines
1) runtime PM is disabled, either at compile time or dynamically
via /sys/devices/.../power/control.2) an i2c client driver uses i2c during it's suspend callback, thus leaving the i2c driver active (NOTE: runtime suspend transitions are disabled during system suspend, so i2c activity during system suspend will runtime resume the device, but not runtime (re)suspend
it.)
Quoted 3 lines
Since the actual work to suspend the device is handled by the subsytem, call the bus methods to take care of it.
The patch looks good to me. Thanks for the fix. Validated suspend on OMAP4sdp with the patch.
Can you elaborate a bit more on how/why runtime PM transitions are disabled during system suspend, and how is it taken care of that a runtime resume of a device works however a subsequent runtime (re)suspend does not?
Regards,
Rajendra
Quoted 7 lines
NOTE: This takes care of a known suspend problem on OMAP3 where the TWL RTC driver does i2c xfers during its suspend path leaving the i2c driver in an active state (since runtime suspend transistions are disabled.)
Signed-off-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>
Review
Quoted 8 lines
---
Ben, this is a regression in 2.6.38 so hopefully this can be queued in the 2.6.38-rc cycle. Thanks.drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)(quoted diff) +0
-0
b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c omap_i2c_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) · line 1144
Quoted 12 lines
index b605ff3..0541df9 100644
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c +5
-0@@ -1137,12 +1137,40 @@ omap_i2c_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)return 0 ; } +#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND +static int omap_i2c_suspend (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) + if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm &&
dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend)
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c omap_i2c_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
Quoted 9 lines
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c +9
-0+ dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend (dev); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int omap_i2c_resume (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) + if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm &&
dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume)
Quoted 25 lines
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c +14
-1+ dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume (dev); + + return 0; +} + +static struct dev_pm_ops omap_i2c_pm_ops = { + .suspend = omap_i2c_suspend, + .resume = omap_i2c_resume, +}; +#else +#define omap_i2c_pm_ops NULL +#endif +static struct platform_driver omap_i2c_driver = { .probe = omap_i2c_probe, .remove = omap_i2c_remove, .driver = { .name ="omap_i2c" , .owner =THIS_MODULE , + .pm = &omap_i2c_pm_ops, }, }; --1.7.3.5
PATCH 1/1 i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
Quoted 4 lines · Rajendra Nayak
Can you elaborate a bit more on how/why runtime PM transitions are disabled during system suspend, and how is it taken care of that a runtime resume of a device works however a subsequent runtime (re)suspend does not?
I'll answer for Kevin. This is done by the PM core, in order to prevent runtime power transitions from interfering with a system power transition. The PM core increments the device's usage_count; this prevents the device from being runtime-suspended but it allows runtime-resume calls to go through.
Alan Stern
PATCH 1/1 i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
Quoted 5 lines
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Stern [mailto:stern at rowland.harvard.edu]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 8:43 PM
To: Rajendra Nayak
Cc: Kevin Hilman; Ben Dooks; linux-i2c at vger.kernel.org;
linux-pm at lists.linux-foundation.org; linux-
Quoted 2 lines
omap at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs.
runtime suspend
Quoted 8 lines · Rajendra Nayak
Quoted 5 lines
Can you elaborate a bit more on how/why runtime PM transitions are disabled during system suspend, and how is it taken care of that a runtime resume of a device works however a subsequent runtime (re)suspend does not?
Quoted 5 lines
I'll answer for Kevin. This is done by the PM core, in order to prevent runtime power transitions from interfering with a system power transition. The PM core increments the device's
usage_count; this prevents the device from being runtime-suspended but it allows runtime-resume calls to go through.
Thanks, I did remember seeing the pm_runtime_get_noresume() in dpm_prepare(). Just did not correlate it was the same Kevin was trying to say.
Regards,
Rajendra
Quoted 2 lines
Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Stern [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 8:43 PM
To: Rajendra Nayak
Cc: Kevin Hilman; Ben Dooks; [email protected];
[email protected]; linux-
Quoted 2 lines
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs.
runtime suspend
Quoted 8 lines · Rajendra Nayak
Quoted 5 lines
Can you elaborate a bit more on how/why runtime PM transitions are disabled during system suspend, and how is it taken care of that a runtime resume of a device works however a subsequent runtime (re)suspend does not?
Quoted 5 lines
I'll answer for Kevin. This is done by the PM core, in order to prevent runtime power transitions from interfering with a system power transition. The PM core increments the device's
usage_count; this prevents the device from being runtime-suspended but it allows runtime-resume calls to go through.
Thanks, I did remember seeing the pm_runtime_get_noresume() in dpm_prepare(). Just did not correlate it was the same Kevin was trying to say.
Regards,
Rajendra
Quoted 2 lines
Alan Stern
PATCH 1/1 i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
In reply to Alan SternQuoted 7 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 4 lines · Rajendra Nayak
Can you elaborate a bit more on how/why runtime PM transitions are disabled during system suspend, and how is it taken care of that a runtime resume of a device works however a subsequent runtime (re)suspend does not?
Quoted 5 lines
I'll answer for Kevin. This is done by the PM core, in order to prevent runtime power transitions from interfering with a system power transition. The PM core increments the device's
usage_count; this prevents the device from being runtime-suspended but it allows runtime-resume calls to go through.
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
More specifically, the reason for $SUBJECT patch is precisely because a runtime resume is allowed, a runtime suspend is not, and thus a system power transititon is prevented.
Kevin
PATCH 1/1 i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
Quoted 3 lines
More specifically, the reason for $SUBJECT patch is precisely because a runtime resume is allowed, a runtime suspend is not, and thus a system power transititon is prevented.
Alan Stern
PATCH 1/1 i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.
Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
Thanks,
Rafael
PATCH 1/1 PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
Quoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because pm_wq is freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.
Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via /sys/devices/.../power/control.
Thanks,
Rafael
---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
The dpm_prepare() function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to prevent pm_runtime_suspend() from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, so pm_runtime_suspend() can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.
Make dpm_prepare() drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.
--- drivers/base/power/main.c | 10 +++------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
drivers/base/power/main.c +3 -7
@@ -669,7 +669,6 @@ static void dpm_complete(pm_message_t stmutex_unlock (&dpm_list_mtx);device_complete (dev, state); -pm_runtime_put_sync (dev);mutex_lock (&dpm_list_mtx);put_device (dev);
@@ -1005,12 +1004,9 @@ static int dpm_prepare(pm_message_t statif (pm_runtime_barrier (dev) &&device_may_wakeup (dev))pm_wakeup_event (dev,0 ); -if (pm_wakeup_pending ()) { -pm_runtime_put_sync (dev); - error = -EBUSY ; - }else { - error =device_prepare (dev, state); - } +pm_runtime_put_sync (dev); + error =pm_wakeup_pending () ? + -EBUSY :device_prepare (dev, state);mutex_lock (&dpm_list_mtx);if (error) {
PATCH 1/1 PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
Quoted 8 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 8 lines
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.
Yes, I had reached essentially the same conclusion. Of course, there may still be other kernel threads running or interrupt handlers that can interfere. It's probably okay to assume that drivers will handle these things.
Quoted 2 lines
Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.
True. So in the end this won't make much difference, but we might as well do it.
Alan Stern
Re: [PATCH] PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
In reply to Rafael J. WysockiQuoted 8 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 8 lines
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.
Yes, I had reached essentially the same conclusion. Of course, there may still be other kernel threads running or interrupt handlers that can interfere. It's probably okay to assume that drivers will handle these things.
Quoted 2 lines
Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.
True. So in the end this won't make much difference, but we might as well do it.
Alan Stern
PATCH 1/1 PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
In reply to Rafael J. WysockiQuoted 54 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.Thanks,
Rafael---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allowpm_runtime_suspend()to succeed during system suspendThe
dpm_prepare()function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to preventpm_runtime_suspend()from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, sopm_runtime_suspend()can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.
Quoted 5 lines
Make
dpm_prepare()drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.Signed-off-by Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>---
Yes!
Quoted 35 lines
drivers/base/power/main.c | 10 +++------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)Index:
linux-2.6/drivers/base/power/main.c
===================================================================drivers/base/power/main.c +3
-8@@ -669,7 +669,6 @@ static void dpm_complete(pm_message_t stmutex_unlock (&dpm_list_mtx);device_complete (dev, state); -pm_runtime_put_sync (dev);mutex_lock (&dpm_list_mtx);put_device (dev);@@ -1005,12 +1004,9 @@ static int dpm_prepare(pm_message_t statif (pm_runtime_barrier (dev) &&device_may_wakeup (dev))pm_wakeup_event (dev,0 ); -if (pm_wakeup_pending ()) { -pm_runtime_put_sync (dev); - error = -EBUSY ; - }else { - error =device_prepare (dev, state); - } +pm_runtime_put_sync (dev); + error =pm_wakeup_pending () ? + -EBUSY :device_prepare (dev, state);mutex_lock (&dpm_list_mtx);if (error) { --To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
PATCH 1/1 PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
Quoted 59 lines · Kevin Hilman
Quoted 57 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.Thanks,
Rafael---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allowpm_runtime_suspend()to succeed during system suspendThe
dpm_prepare()function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to preventpm_runtime_suspend()from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, sopm_runtime_suspend()can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.Make
dpm_prepare()drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Signed-off-by Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>---
Yes!
Acked-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>
Well, I hope you realize that it doesn't help you a lot?
Rafael
PATCH 1/1 PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
Quoted 60 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 59 lines · Kevin Hilman
Quoted 57 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.Thanks,
Rafael---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allowpm_runtime_suspend()to succeed during system suspendThe
dpm_prepare()function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to preventpm_runtime_suspend()from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, sopm_runtime_suspend()can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.Make
dpm_prepare()drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Signed-off-by Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>---
Yes!
Acked-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>Well, I hope you realize that it doesn't help you a lot?
If you mean that because we still have to implement system PM methods because of /sys/devices/.../power/control, I agree.
If something else, please explain.
But to me it is still very helpful in terms of consistency and what driver writers would expect to happen if they used pm_runtime_suspend() in their system suspend method.
Thanks,
Kevin
PATCH 1/1 PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
Quoted 67 lines · Kevin Hilman
Quoted 65 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 64 lines · Kevin Hilman
Quoted 54 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.Thanks,
Rafael---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allowpm_runtime_suspend()to succeed during system suspendThe
dpm_prepare()function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to preventpm_runtime_suspend()from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, sopm_runtime_suspend()can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.Quoted 5 lines
Make
dpm_prepare()drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.Signed-off-by Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>---
Yes!
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Acked-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>Well, I hope you realize that it doesn't help you a lot?
If you mean that because we still have to implement system PM methods because of
/sys/devices/.../power/control, I agree.
Yes, I meant that.
Quoted 5 lines
If something else, please explain.
But to me it is still very helpful in terms of consistency and what driver writers would expect to happen if they used
pm_runtime_suspend()in their system suspend method.
OK
Thanks,
Rafael
Re: [PATCH] PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
In reply to Kevin HilmanQuoted 67 lines · Kevin Hilman
Quoted 65 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 64 lines · Kevin Hilman
Quoted 54 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.Thanks,
Rafael---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allowpm_runtime_suspend()to succeed during system suspendThe
dpm_prepare()function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to preventpm_runtime_suspend()from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, sopm_runtime_suspend()can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.Quoted 5 lines
Make
dpm_prepare()drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.Signed-off-by Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>---
Yes!
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Acked-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>Well, I hope you realize that it doesn't help you a lot?
If you mean that because we still have to implement system PM methods because of
/sys/devices/.../power/control, I agree.
Yes, I meant that.
Quoted 5 lines
If something else, please explain.
But to me it is still very helpful in terms of consistency and what driver writers would expect to happen if they used
pm_runtime_suspend()in their system suspend method.
OK
Thanks,
Rafael
Re: [PATCH] PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
In reply to Rafael J. WysockiQuoted 60 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 59 lines · Kevin Hilman
Quoted 57 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.Thanks,
Rafael---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allowpm_runtime_suspend()to succeed during system suspendThe
dpm_prepare()function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to preventpm_runtime_suspend()from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, sopm_runtime_suspend()can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.Make
dpm_prepare()drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Signed-off-by Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>---
Yes!
Acked-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>Well, I hope you realize that it doesn't help you a lot?
If you mean that because we still have to implement system PM methods because of /sys/devices/.../power/control, I agree.
If something else, please explain.
But to me it is still very helpful in terms of consistency and what driver writers would expect to happen if they used pm_runtime_suspend() in their system suspend method.
Thanks,
Kevin
Re: [PATCH] PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
In reply to Kevin HilmanQuoted 59 lines · Kevin Hilman
Quoted 57 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.Thanks,
Rafael---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allowpm_runtime_suspend()to succeed during system suspendThe
dpm_prepare()function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to preventpm_runtime_suspend()from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, sopm_runtime_suspend()can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.Make
dpm_prepare()drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Signed-off-by Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>---
Yes!
Acked-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>
Well, I hope you realize that it doesn't help you a lot?
Rafael
Re: [PATCH] PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
In reply to Rafael J. WysockiQuoted 54 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because
pm_wqis freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via
/sys/devices/.../power/control.Thanks,
Rafael---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allowpm_runtime_suspend()to succeed during system suspendThe
dpm_prepare()function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to preventpm_runtime_suspend()from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, sopm_runtime_suspend()can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.
Quoted 5 lines
Make
dpm_prepare()drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.Signed-off-by Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>---
Yes!
Quoted 35 lines
drivers/base/power/main.c | 10 +++------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)Index:
linux-2.6/drivers/base/power/main.c
===================================================================drivers/base/power/main.c +3
-8@@ -669,7 +669,6 @@ static void dpm_complete(pm_message_t stmutex_unlock (&dpm_list_mtx);device_complete (dev, state); -pm_runtime_put_sync (dev);mutex_lock (&dpm_list_mtx);put_device (dev);@@ -1005,12 +1004,9 @@ static int dpm_prepare(pm_message_t statif (pm_runtime_barrier (dev) &&device_may_wakeup (dev))pm_wakeup_event (dev,0 ); -if (pm_wakeup_pending ()) { -pm_runtime_put_sync (dev); - error = -EBUSY ; - }else { - error =device_prepare (dev, state); - } +pm_runtime_put_sync (dev); + error =pm_wakeup_pending () ? + -EBUSY :device_prepare (dev, state);mutex_lock (&dpm_list_mtx);if (error) { --To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
PATCH 1/1 PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
In reply to Rafael J. WysockiQuoted 21 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
Quoted 8 lines
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
In fact, I've just realized that the above race cannot really occur, because pm_wq is freezable, so I'm proposing the following change.
Of course, it still doesn't prevent user space from disabling the runtime PM framework's helpers via /sys/devices/.../power/control.
Thanks,
Rafael
---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>
Subject: PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend
The dpm_prepare() function increments the runtime PM reference counters of all devices to prevent pm_runtime_suspend() from executing subsystem-level callbacks. However, this was supposed to guard against a specific race condition that cannot happen, because the power management workqueue is freezable, so pm_runtime_suspend() can only be called synchronously during system suspend and we can rely on subsystems and device drivers to avoid doing that unnecessarily.
Make dpm_prepare() drop the runtime PM reference to each device after making sure that runtime resume is not pending for it.
--- drivers/base/power/main.c | 10 +++------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
drivers/base/power/main.c +3 -7
@@ -669,7 +669,6 @@ static void dpm_complete(pm_message_t stmutex_unlock (&dpm_list_mtx);device_complete (dev, state); -pm_runtime_put_sync (dev);mutex_lock (&dpm_list_mtx);put_device (dev);
@@ -1005,12 +1004,9 @@ static int dpm_prepare(pm_message_t statif (pm_runtime_barrier (dev) &&device_may_wakeup (dev))pm_wakeup_event (dev,0 ); -if (pm_wakeup_pending ()) { -pm_runtime_put_sync (dev); - error = -EBUSY ; - }else { - error =device_prepare (dev, state); - } +pm_runtime_put_sync (dev); + error =pm_wakeup_pending () ? + -EBUSY :device_prepare (dev, state);mutex_lock (&dpm_list_mtx);if (error) {
Quoted 11 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
The reason why runtime resume is allowed during system power transitions is because in some cases during system suspend we simply have to resume devices that were previously runtime-suspended (for example, the PCI bus type does that).
The reason why runtime suspend is not allowed during system power transitions if the following race:
- A device has been suspended via a system suspend callback.
- The runtime PM framework executes a (scheduled) suspend on that device, not knowing that it's already been suspended, which potentially results in accessing the device's registers in a low-power state.
Now, it can be avoided if every driver does the right thing and checks whether the device is already suspended in its runtime suspend callback, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of the runtime PM framework, at least partially.
Thanks,
Rafael
Quoted 5 lines · Kevin Hilman
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
These are good questions. Rafael implemented this design originally; my contribution was only to warn him of the potential for problems. Therefore he should explain the rationale for the design.
Quoted 3 lines
More specifically, the reason for $SUBJECT patch is precisely because a runtime resume is allowed, a runtime suspend is not, and thus a system power transititon is prevented.
Alan Stern
Quoted 7 lines · Alan Stern
Quoted 4 lines · Rajendra Nayak
Can you elaborate a bit more on how/why runtime PM transitions are disabled during system suspend, and how is it taken care of that a runtime resume of a device works however a subsequent runtime (re)suspend does not?
Quoted 5 lines
I'll answer for Kevin. This is done by the PM core, in order to prevent runtime power transitions from interfering with a system power transition. The PM core increments the device's
usage_count; this prevents the device from being runtime-suspended but it allows runtime-resume calls to go through.
I understand how this works, but frankly I'm still a bit fuzzy on why.
I guess I'm still missing a good understanding of what "interfering with a system power transition" means, and why a runtime suspend qualifies as interfering but not a runtime resume.
More specifically, the reason for $SUBJECT patch is precisely because a runtime resume is allowed, a runtime suspend is not, and thus a system power transititon is prevented.
Kevin
Quoted 4 lines · Rajendra Nayak
Can you elaborate a bit more on how/why runtime PM transitions are disabled during system suspend, and how is it taken care of that a runtime resume of a device works however a subsequent runtime (re)suspend does not?
I'll answer for Kevin. This is done by the PM core, in order to prevent runtime power transitions from interfering with a system power transition. The PM core increments the device's usage_count; this prevents the device from being runtime-suspended but it allows runtime-resume calls to go through.
Alan Stern
Hi Kevin,
Quoted 5 lines
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 5:49 AM
To: Ben Dooks; Rajendra Nayak; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
Quoted 6 lines
Subject: [PATCH] i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
When runtime PM is enabled, each OMAP i2c device is suspended after each i2c xfer. However, there are two cases when the static suspend methods must be used to ensure the devices are suspended:
Quoted 6 lines
1) runtime PM is disabled, either at compile time or dynamically
via /sys/devices/.../power/control.2) an i2c client driver uses i2c during it's suspend callback, thus leaving the i2c driver active (NOTE: runtime suspend transitions are disabled during system suspend, so i2c activity during system suspend will runtime resume the device, but not runtime (re)suspend
it.)
Quoted 3 lines
Since the actual work to suspend the device is handled by the subsytem, call the bus methods to take care of it.
The patch looks good to me. Thanks for the fix. Validated suspend on OMAP4sdp with the patch.
Can you elaborate a bit more on how/why runtime PM transitions are disabled during system suspend, and how is it taken care of that a runtime resume of a device works however a subsequent runtime (re)suspend does not?
Regards,
Rajendra
Quoted 7 lines
NOTE: This takes care of a known suspend problem on OMAP3 where the TWL RTC driver does i2c xfers during its suspend path leaving the i2c driver in an active state (since runtime suspend transistions are disabled.)
Signed-off-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>
Review
Quoted 8 lines
---
Ben, this is a regression in 2.6.38 so hopefully this can be queued in the 2.6.38-rc cycle. Thanks.drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)(quoted diff) +0
-0
b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c omap_i2c_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) · line 1144
Quoted 12 lines
index b605ff3..0541df9 100644
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c +5
-0@@ -1137,12 +1137,40 @@ omap_i2c_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)return 0 ; } +#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND +static int omap_i2c_suspend (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) + if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm &&
dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend)
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c omap_i2c_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
Quoted 9 lines
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c +9
-0+ dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend (dev); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int omap_i2c_resume (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) + if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm &&
dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume)
Quoted 25 lines
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c +14
-1+ dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume (dev); + + return 0; +} + +static struct dev_pm_ops omap_i2c_pm_ops = { + .suspend = omap_i2c_suspend, + .resume = omap_i2c_resume, +}; +#else +#define omap_i2c_pm_ops NULL +#endif +static struct platform_driver omap_i2c_driver = { .probe = omap_i2c_probe, .remove = omap_i2c_remove, .driver = { .name ="omap_i2c" , .owner =THIS_MODULE , + .pm = &omap_i2c_pm_ops, }, }; --1.7.3.5
PATCH 1/1 i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
In reply to Kevin HilmanQuoted 19 lines · Kevin Hilman
When runtime PM is enabled, each OMAP i2c device is suspended after each i2c xfer. However, there are two cases when the static suspend methods must be used to ensure the devices are suspended:
1) runtime PM is disabled, either at compile time or dynamically
via /sys/devices/.../power/control.2) an i2c client driver uses i2c during it's suspend callback, thus leaving the i2c driver active (NOTE: runtime suspend transitions are disabled during system suspend, so i2c activity during system suspend will runtime resume the device, but not runtime (re)suspend it.)
Since the actual work to suspend the device is handled by the subsytem, call the bus methods to take care of it.
NOTE: This takes care of a known suspend problem on OMAP3 where the TWL RTC driver does i2c xfers during its suspend path leaving the i2c driver in an active state (since runtime suspend transistions are disabled.)
Quoted 4 lines
Signed-off-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>---
Ben, this is a regression in 2.6.38 so hopefully this can be queued in the 2.6.38-rc cycle. Thanks.
Ok, after all the discussions should I keep it in my -rc queue?
Quoted 55 lines
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c +28
-0@@ -1137,12 +1137,40 @@ omap_i2c_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)return 0 ; } +#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND +static int omap_i2c_suspend (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) +if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm && dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend) + dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend (dev); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int omap_i2c_resume (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) +if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm && dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume) + dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume (dev); + +return 0 ; +} + +static struct dev_pm_ops omap_i2c_pm_ops = { + .suspend = omap_i2c_suspend, + .resume = omap_i2c_resume, +}; +#else +#define omap_i2c_pm_ops NULL +#endif +static struct platform_driver omap_i2c_driver = { .probe = omap_i2c_probe, .remove = omap_i2c_remove, .driver = { .name ="omap_i2c" , .owner =THIS_MODULE , + .pm = &omap_i2c_pm_ops, }, };Signature · 6 lines
1.7.3.5 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Signature · 3 lines
Ben Dooks, ben at fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/ben/ Large Hadron Colada: A large Pina Colada that makes the universe disappear.
PATCH 1/1 i2c: OMAP: fix static suspend vs. runtime suspend
Quoted 20 lines · Ben Dooks
Quoted 19 lines · Kevin Hilman
When runtime PM is enabled, each OMAP i2c device is suspended after each i2c xfer. However, there are two cases when the static suspend methods must be used to ensure the devices are suspended:
1) runtime PM is disabled, either at compile time or dynamically
via /sys/devices/.../power/control.2) an i2c client driver uses i2c during it's suspend callback, thus leaving the i2c driver active (NOTE: runtime suspend transitions are disabled during system suspend, so i2c activity during system suspend will runtime resume the device, but not runtime (re)suspend it.)
Since the actual work to suspend the device is handled by the subsytem, call the bus methods to take care of it.
NOTE: This takes care of a known suspend problem on OMAP3 where the TWL RTC driver does i2c xfers during its suspend path leaving the i2c driver in an active state (since runtime suspend transistions are disabled.)
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Signed-off-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>---
Ben, this is a regression in 2.6.38 so hopefully this can be queued in the 2.6.38-rc cycle. Thanks.Ok, after all the discussions should I keep it in my -rc queue?
Yes, please.
Kevin
Quoted 20 lines · Ben Dooks
Quoted 19 lines · Kevin Hilman
When runtime PM is enabled, each OMAP i2c device is suspended after each i2c xfer. However, there are two cases when the static suspend methods must be used to ensure the devices are suspended:
1) runtime PM is disabled, either at compile time or dynamically
via /sys/devices/.../power/control.2) an i2c client driver uses i2c during it's suspend callback, thus leaving the i2c driver active (NOTE: runtime suspend transitions are disabled during system suspend, so i2c activity during system suspend will runtime resume the device, but not runtime (re)suspend it.)
Since the actual work to suspend the device is handled by the subsytem, call the bus methods to take care of it.
NOTE: This takes care of a known suspend problem on OMAP3 where the TWL RTC driver does i2c xfers during its suspend path leaving the i2c driver in an active state (since runtime suspend transistions are disabled.)
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Signed-off-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>---
Ben, this is a regression in 2.6.38 so hopefully this can be queued in the 2.6.38-rc cycle. Thanks.Ok, after all the discussions should I keep it in my -rc queue?
Yes, please.
Kevin
Quoted 19 lines · Kevin Hilman
When runtime PM is enabled, each OMAP i2c device is suspended after each i2c xfer. However, there are two cases when the static suspend methods must be used to ensure the devices are suspended:
1) runtime PM is disabled, either at compile time or dynamically
via /sys/devices/.../power/control.2) an i2c client driver uses i2c during it's suspend callback, thus leaving the i2c driver active (NOTE: runtime suspend transitions are disabled during system suspend, so i2c activity during system suspend will runtime resume the device, but not runtime (re)suspend it.)
Since the actual work to suspend the device is handled by the subsytem, call the bus methods to take care of it.
NOTE: This takes care of a known suspend problem on OMAP3 where the TWL RTC driver does i2c xfers during its suspend path leaving the i2c driver in an active state (since runtime suspend transistions are disabled.)
Quoted 4 lines
Signed-off-by Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>---
Ben, this is a regression in 2.6.38 so hopefully this can be queued in the 2.6.38-rc cycle. Thanks.
Ok, after all the discussions should I keep it in my -rc queue?
Quoted 55 lines
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c +28
-0@@ -1137,12 +1137,40 @@ omap_i2c_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)return 0 ; } +#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND +static int omap_i2c_suspend (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) +if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm && dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend) + dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend (dev); + +return 0 ; +} + +static int omap_i2c_resume (struct device *dev) +{ +if (!pm_runtime_suspended (dev)) +if (dev->bus && dev->bus->pm && dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume) + dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume (dev); + +return 0 ; +} + +static struct dev_pm_ops omap_i2c_pm_ops = { + .suspend = omap_i2c_suspend, + .resume = omap_i2c_resume, +}; +#else +#define omap_i2c_pm_ops NULL +#endif +static struct platform_driver omap_i2c_driver = { .probe = omap_i2c_probe, .remove = omap_i2c_remove, .driver = { .name ="omap_i2c" , .owner =THIS_MODULE , + .pm = &omap_i2c_pm_ops, }, };Signature · 6 lines
1.7.3.5 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Signature · 3 lines
Ben Dooks, [email protected], http://www.fluff.org/ben/ Large Hadron Colada: A large Pina Colada that makes the universe disappear.