Re: [PATCH] PM: Prevent waiting forever on asynchronous resume after abort

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, September 02, 2010, Colin Cross wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 02, 2010, Colin Cross wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Thursday, September 02, 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, Colin Cross wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Only wait on a parent device during resume if the parent device is
> >> >> > suspended.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Consider three drivers, A, B, and C.  The parent of A is C, and C
> >> >> > has async_suspend set.  On boot, C->power.completion is initialized
> >> >> > to 0.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > During the first suspend:
> >> >> > suspend_devices_and_enter(...)
> >> >> >  dpm_resume(...)
> >> >> >   device_suspend(A)
> >> >> >   device_suspend(B) returns error, aborts suspend
> >> >> >  dpm_resume_end(...)
> >> >> >    dpm_resume(...)
> >> >> >     device_resume(A)
> >> >> >      dpm_wait(A->parent == C)
> >> >> >       wait_for_completion(C->power.completion)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The wait_for_completion will never complete, because
> >> >> > complete_all(C->power.completion) will only be called from
> >> >> > device_suspend(C) or device_resume(C), neither of which is called
> >> >> > if suspend is aborted before C.
> >> >>
> >> >> This would work okay if C->power.completion had been initialized to the
> >> >> completed state during boot, right?
> >> >>
> >> >> > After a successful suspend->resume cycle, where B doesn't abort
> >> >> > suspend, C->power.completion is left in the completed state by the
> >> >> > call to device_resume(C), and the same call path will work if B
> >> >> > aborts suspend.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Colin Cross <ccross@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> >  drivers/base/power/main.c |    3 ++-
> >> >> >  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > diff --git a/drivers/base/power/main.c b/drivers/base/power/main.c
> >> >> > index cb784a0..e159910 100644
> >> >> > --- a/drivers/base/power/main.c
> >> >> > +++ b/drivers/base/power/main.c
> >> >> > @@ -526,7 +526,8 @@ static int device_resume(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state, bool async)
> >> >> >     TRACE_DEVICE(dev);
> >> >> >     TRACE_RESUME(0);
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -   dpm_wait(dev->parent, async);
> >> >> > +   if (dev->parent && dev->parent->power.status >= DPM_OFF)
> >> >> > +           dpm_wait(dev->parent, async);
> >> >> >     device_lock(dev);
> >> >> >
> >> >> >     dev->power.status = DPM_RESUMING;
> >> >>
> >> >> I think it would be better to change device_pm_init() and add a
> >> >> complete_all().
> >> >
> >> > I agree.
> >> That would work, and was my first solution, but it increases the
> >> reliance on the completion variable being left completed between state
> >> transitions, which is undocumented and unnecessary.
> >
> > In fact it is necessary, because dpm_wait() may be called by external code
> > through device_pm_wait_for_dev() which is exported for a reason.  That may
> > lead to problems analogous to the one you described if the completion
> > variables are not completed initially.
> >
> >> It seems more straightforward to me to only wait on the parent if the parent is
> >> suspended.
> >>
> >> > Who's writing the patch?
> >> I'll write it if you still don't like this one.
> >
> > Yes, please.
> OK - do you prefer it in dpm_prepare or device_pm_init?

device_pm_init(), please.

Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/