Re: [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Only force-resume device if it has been force-suspended

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hello,

Reviving this old thread.

On Monday 07 Mar 2016 11:10:08 Ulf Hansson wrote:
> [...]
> 
> >> I agree, that's a better idea. Drivers shouldn't call
> >> pm_runtime_force_resume() if they haven't called
> >> pm_runtime_force_suspend(), so checking the PM use count should be fine.
> >> I'll modify the patch, test it and resubmit.
> > 
> > I gave it an unfortunately unsuccessful try. The problem I ran into is
> > that device_prepare() calls pm_runtime_get_noresume() calls
> > pm_runtime_get_noresume(), with the corresponding pm_runtime_put() call
> > being performed in device_complete(). The device power usage_count is
> > thus always non-zero in the system resume handler, so I can't base the
> > decision on that.
>
> As Alan said, let's just check against 1 instead.

I gave this a try, and unfortunately it won't work.

pm_genpd_prepare() resumes devices without increasing the usage count, which 
leads to the device always being active in pm_runtime_force_suspend(). The 
usage count will be 1 if the device was suspended prior to entering system 
suspend (due to the pm_runtime_get_noresume() call in device_prepare()) or 
higher than 1 if the device was active.

However, pm_genpd_prepare() will not resume the device if suspend_power_off is 
set. In that case the device will be suspended with a usage count of 1 in 
pm_runtime_force_suspend() or active with a usage count higher than 1.

We thus can't detect at resume time whether we have force-suspended the device 
using the usage count.

Unless someone has another clever idea I'll keep the power.is_force_suspended 
flag and protect it with power.lock.

> > I also noticed that pm_genpd_prepare() runtime-resumes the device (when
> > the power domain is in the GPD_STATE_ACTIVE state). I don't know why that
> > is, but it means that in practice my device gets runtime-resumed when
> > suspending the system while it could stay runtime-suspended in practice.
> 
> I am aware of this and it's on my TODO list of improvements of genpd,
> The issue is related to an unoptimized behaviour for how genpd deal
> with wakeups during system PM.

Looking forward to seeing patches :-)

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart