Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] PM: runtime: Do not call __rpm_callback() from rpm_idle()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 8:45 AM Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2/12/22 16:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Calling __rpm_callback() from rpm_idle() after adding device links
> > support to the former is a clear mistake.
> >
> > Not only it causes rpm_idle() to carry out unnecessary actions, but it
> > is also against the assumption regarding the stability of PM-runtime
> > status accross __rpm_callback() invocations, because rpm_suspend() and
>
> accross -> across

Fixed whey applying the patch.

> > rpm_resume() may run in parallel with __rpm_callback() when it is called
> > by rpm_idle() and the device's PM-runtime status can be updated by any
> > of them.
> >
> > Fixes: 21d5c57b3726 ("PM / runtime: Use device links")
>
> Reviewed-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>

Thank you!

> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/base/power/runtime.c |   12 +++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > Index: linux-pm/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> > +++ linux-pm/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
> > @@ -484,7 +484,17 @@ static int rpm_idle(struct device *dev,
> >
> >       dev->power.idle_notification = true;
> >
> > -     retval = __rpm_callback(callback, dev);
> > +     if (dev->power.irq_safe)
> > +             spin_unlock(&dev->power.lock);
> > +     else
> > +             spin_unlock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
> > +
> > +     retval = callback(dev);
> > +
> > +     if (dev->power.irq_safe)
> > +             spin_lock(&dev->power.lock);
> > +     else
> > +             spin_lock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
> >
> >       dev->power.idle_notification = false;
> >       wake_up_all(&dev->power.wait_queue);
> >
> >
> >
>