Re: [PATCH v9 2/4] amba: Don't unprepare the clocks if device driver wants IRQ safe runtime PM
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <hidden>
Date: 2014-11-07 12:18:12
Also in:
lkml
On pią, 2014-11-07 at 13:13 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2014-11-05 09:42:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:quoted
On wto, 2014-11-04 at 21:18 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:quoted
On Tue 2014-11-04 13:52:48, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:quoted
The AMBA bus driver defines runtime Power Management functions which disable and unprepare AMBA bus clock. This is problematic for runtime PM because unpreparing a clock might sleep so it is not interrupt safe. However some drivers may want to implement runtime PM functions in interrupt-safe way (see pm_runtime_irq_safe()). In such case the AMBA bus driver should only disable/enable the clock in runtime suspend and resume callbacks.quoted
/* * Hooks to provide runtime PM of the pclk (bus clock). It is safe to * enable/disable the bus clock at runtime PM suspend/resume as this@@ -95,8 +102,14 @@ static int amba_pm_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev) struct amba_device *pcdev = to_amba_device(dev); int ret = pm_generic_runtime_suspend(dev); - if (ret == 0 && dev->driver) - clk_disable_unprepare(pcdev->pclk); + if (ret == 0 && dev->driver) { + pcdev->irq_safe = get_pm_runtime_irq_safe(dev); + + if (pcdev->irq_safe) + clk_disable(pcdev->pclk); + else + clk_disable_unprepare(pcdev->pclk); + }So you can handle the case of !pcdev->irq_safe. What is the penalty for always assuming !pcdev->irq_safe?The penalty (for pl330 driver) would be that the runtime resume/suspend cannot happen from atomic context => pm_runtime_get_sync() cannot be called from atomic context => complete rework of runtime PM for pl330 DMA driver because now one of pm_runtime_get_sync() calls is in device_issue_pending callback which may not sleep. And by "rework" I also mean that I do not know how to do this... yet.I still don't get it. You say that you don't know how to handle !pcdev->irq_safe case... Yet have code above that tries to handle it. If that case can't be sanely handled, I'd expect BUG_ON(!pcdev->irq_safe).
Hmmm... I could misunderstand your question. The amba/bus.c driver can handle both cases. However this varies for child drivers (which use these runtime PM callbacks too). For pl330 cannot handle non-irq-safe. Other drivers can. Is it the answer for your question? Best regards, Krzysztof