Re: [PATCH] PM / core: Fix supplier device runtime PM usage counter imbalance

[Marek Szyprowski]

Hi Rafael,

On 2018-06-12 16:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 2:44:23 PM CEST Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>> On 2018-06-12 13:00, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> If a device link is added via device_link_add() by the driver of the
>>> link's consumer device, the supplier's runtime PM usage counter is
>>> going to be dropped by the pm_runtime_put_suppliers() call in
>>> driver_probe_device().  However, in that case it is not incremented
>>> unless the supplier driver is already present and the link is not
>>> stateless.  That leads to a runtime PM usage counter imbalance for
>>> the supplier device in a few cases.
>>>
>>> To prevent that from happening, bump up the supplier runtime
>>> PM usage counter in device_link_add() for all links with the
>>> DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME flag set that are added at the consumer probe
>>> time.  Use pm_runtime_get_noresume() for that as the callers of
>>> device_link_add() who want the supplier to be resumed by it should
>>> pass DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE in flags to it anyway.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 21d5c57b3726 (PM / runtime: Use device links)
>>> Reported-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> This is a replacement for commit 1e8378619841 (PM / runtime: Fixup
>>> reference counting of device link suppliers at probe) that is going
>>> to be reverted.
>> Thanks Rafael for the patch. I've applied it and now I'm a bit puzzled.
> Thanks for testing! :-)
>
>> Let's get back to my IOMMU and codec case, mentioned here:
>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-pm&m=152878741527962&w=2
>>
>> Now, after applying your patch, when IOMMU creates a link with
>> DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME to the jpeg device (this happens when jpeg device is
>> being probed), it is not IOMMU is not runtime resumed anymore (that's
>> because the patch changes pm_runtime_get_sync to pm_runtime_get_noresume).
>> This means that until jpeg driver enables runtime pm for its device and
>> finally performs runtime pm suspends/resume cycle, the supplier won't be
>> resumed. On the other hand, when I add DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE flag to link
>> creation, the supplier is properly resumed, but then, once the jpeg
>> device probe finishes, the supplier is still in runtime active state
>> until a next runtime suspend/resume cycle of jpeg device.
> That additional suspend-resume cycle should not be necessary in theory
> unless I'm missing something.
>
> The pm_request_idle() call in driver_probe_device() should trigger a
> suspend of the jpeg device after probe (unless blocked by something)
> and that should drop the RPM usage counter of the IOMMU.  Next, the
> pm_runtime_put_suppliers() in there should actually suspend it.

I've also would expect such behavior of PM core, but checks on real
hardware gives other results.

> It looks like the pm_request_idle() doesn't work as expected.

pm_request_idle() calls rpm_idle(), which returns early with -EAGAIN due to
(dev->power.runtime_status != RPM_ACTIVE) check. The device runtime_status
is RPM_SUSPENDED as initially set by pm_runtime_init() on device creation.
Notice that JPEG driver only calls pm_runtime_enable() and nothing more.

>> If I understand right, the DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE flag should be there from the
>> beginning, but that time it runtime pm part of links worked in a bit
>> different way than now.
> Right, and evidently there are callers depending on the existing behavior.
>   
>> Is there any way to keep old behavior?
> Yes, there is, please test the appended v2 of the $subject patch.
>
> That said, I'd like to remove the extra supplier resume from there going
> forward as there may be callers who actually don't want that to happen and
> DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE is there for a purpose.

Frankly, if the current behavior matches the designed behavior of
DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE flag, then maybe instead of adding workarounds now, we
should simply fix all existing callers of device_link_add()? 'git grep' 
shows
only 6 places where links are created with DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME flag, I see no
problem to add DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE there to keep current behavior after a fix
in runtime PM core. The description of DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE should also be 
a bit
updated, because I initially thought that it means that the runtime pm 
counter
on supplier is increased for the whole lifetime of the device link (it 
is not
clear when core will call a corresponding pm_runtime_put()).

The other question is what need to be fixed to get proper behavior 
without the
additional suspend/resume cycle mentioned a few paragraphs above.

> ---
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [PATCH v2] PM / core: Fix supplier device runtime PM usage counter imbalance
>
> If a device link is added via device_link_add() by the driver of the
> link's consumer device, the supplier's runtime PM usage counter is
> going to be dropped by the pm_runtime_put_suppliers() call in
> driver_probe_device().  However, in that case it is not incremented
> unless the supplier driver is already present and the link is not
> stateless.  That leads to a runtime PM usage counter imbalance for
> the supplier device in a few cases.
>
> To prevent that from happening, bump up the supplier runtime
> PM usage counter in device_link_add() for all links with the
> DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME flag set that are added at the consumer probe
> time.  Use pm_runtime_get_noresume() for that as the callers of
> device_link_add() who want the supplier to be resumed by it are
> expected to pass DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE in flags to it anyway, but
> additionally resume the supplier if the link is added during
> consumer driver probe to retain the existing behavior for the
> callers depending on it.
>
> Fixes: 21d5c57b3726 (PM / runtime: Use device links)
> Reported-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>

I've tested this version of the patch and it keeps the current behavior for
links created with DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME flag. The questions is if we really
want it?

> ---
>   drivers/base/core.c |   15 +++++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/base/core.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/base/core.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/base/core.c
> @@ -216,6 +216,13 @@ struct device_link *device_link_add(stru
>   			link->rpm_active = true;
>   		}
>   		pm_runtime_new_link(consumer);
> +		/*
> +		 * If the link is being added by the consumer driver at probe
> +		 * time, balance the decrementation of the supplier's runtime PM
> +		 * usage counter after consumer probe in driver_probe_device().
> +		 */
> +		if (consumer->links.status == DL_DEV_PROBING)
> +			pm_runtime_get_noresume(supplier);
>   	}
>   	get_device(supplier);
>   	link->supplier = supplier;
> @@ -235,12 +242,12 @@ struct device_link *device_link_add(stru
>   			switch (consumer->links.status) {
>   			case DL_DEV_PROBING:
>   				/*
> -				 * Balance the decrementation of the supplier's
> -				 * runtime PM usage counter after consumer probe
> -				 * in driver_probe_device().
> +				 * Some callers expect the link creation during
> +				 * consumer driver probe to resume the supplier
> +				 * even without DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE.
>   				 */
>   				if (flags & DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME)
> -					pm_runtime_get_sync(supplier);
> +					pm_runtime_resume(supplier);
>   
>   				link->status = DL_STATE_CONSUMER_PROBE;
>   				break;
>
>
>
>

Best regards
-- 
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland