Re: [PATCH] pnp: Bypass the calling to pnp_stop_dev at suspend whenthere is a protocol suspend

From: Yanmin Zhang
Date: Sun Jan 05 2014 - 20:18:57 EST

On ä, 2013-12-24 at 09:35 +0800, shuox.liu@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Zhang Yanmin <yanmin.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
> pnp pnp_bus_suspend/_resume have an issue.
> pnp_bus_suspend calls pnp_stop_dev to disable the device. With ACPI,
> pnp_stop_dev turns off the dev usually. Then,
> pnp_bus_suspend=>pnp_dev->protocol->suspend accesses the device and
> suspend it again.
> pnp_bus_resume has the similar issue.
> Another issue is firmware might just provide _DIS, but no_STS method.
> The patch fixes it by adding a checking. If there is
> pnp_dev->protocol->suspend, pnp_bus_suspend doesn't call pnp_stop_dev.
> Do the similar thing for _resume.

What's your idea about this patch?

We hit the issue when enabling Android on a latest tablet. After
suspend-to-ram wakeup, serial console doesn't work.
This serial port is bound by pnpcore driver.
At suspending,
static int __pnp_bus_suspend(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state)

if (pnp_can_disable(pnp_dev)) {
error = pnp_stop_dev(pnp_dev);
if (error)
return error;

if (pnp_dev->protocol->suspend)
pnp_dev->protocol->suspend(pnp_dev, state);
return 0;

pnp_stop_dev calls dev->protocol->disable.
As for ACPI device, that disable callback calls _DIS. Based
on ACPI spec, driver need turn off the device before disabling it
by _DIS. That means, after pnp_stop_dev returns, the device is at OFF

Then, __pnp_bus_suspend calls pnp_dev->protocol->suspend, which
continues to access the device while the device is at OFF.

Our firmware just provides _DIS for the device. There is no _STS
method. Then, after wakeup, the device doesn't work.

But just like what the patch points out, pnp_dev->protocol->suspend
continues to access the device while the device is at OFF. It's not safe.

The patch looks like a workaround. Another possible fix is to just
delete the calling of pnp_stop_dev in function __pnp_bus_suspend, as
suspend is not equal to _disable_.
The deletion might be a little intrusive. That's why we sent a workaround
patch to LKML.

Which one is better?


> Signed-off-by: Zhang Yanmin <yanmin.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/pnp/driver.c | 6 ++----
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/drivers/pnp/driver.c b/drivers/pnp/driver.c
> index f748cc8..2512e47 100644
> --- a/drivers/pnp/driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/pnp/driver.c
> @@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ static int __pnp_bus_suspend(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state)
> return error;
> }
> - if (pnp_can_disable(pnp_dev)) {
> + if (pnp_can_disable(pnp_dev) && !pnp_dev->protocol->suspend) {
> error = pnp_stop_dev(pnp_dev);
> if (error)
> return error;
> @@ -215,9 +215,7 @@ static int pnp_bus_resume(struct device *dev)
> error = pnp_dev->protocol->resume(pnp_dev);
> if (error)
> return error;
> - }
> -
> - if (pnp_can_write(pnp_dev)) {
> + } else if (pnp_can_write(pnp_dev)) {
> error = pnp_start_dev(pnp_dev);
> if (error)
> return error;

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at