All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ji Luo <ji.luo@nxp.com>,
	Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/4] of: platform: Batch fwnode parsing when adding all top level devices
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 16:00:33 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGETcx-rHFthf-aLb_S-ST6Evozvgis5XX5u0LNxyvfMoJOLKQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdU2gF=aTeVxRvtzAMLGY=GyBDfBwrYZxoRkL1tV7dL56g@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:32 AM Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Saravana,
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 8:36 PM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 5:20 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 7:38 AM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com> wrote:
> > > > The fw_devlink_pause() and fw_devlink_resume() APIs allow batching the
> > > > parsing of the device tree nodes when a lot of devices are added. This
> > > > will significantly cut down parsing time (as much a 1 second on some
> > > > systems). So, use them when adding devices for all the top level device
> > > > tree nodes in a system.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>
> > >
> > > This is now commit 93d2e4322aa74c1a ("of: platform: Batch fwnode parsing
> > > when adding all top level devices") in v5.8-rc1, and I have bisected a
> > > regression to it: on r8a7740/armadillo and sh73a0/kzm9g, the system can
> > > no longer be woken up from s2ram by a GPIO key. Reverting the commit
> > > fixes the issue.
> > >
> > > On these systems, the GPIO/PFC block has its interrupt lines connected
> > > to intermediate interrupt controllers (Renesas INTC), which are in turn
> > > connected to the main interrupt controller (ARM GIC).  The INTC block is
> > > part of a power and clock domain.  Hence if a GPIO is enabled as a
> > > wake-up source, the INTC is part of the wake-up path, and thus must be
> > > kept enabled when entering s2ram.
> > >
> > > While this commit has no impact on probe order for me (unlike in Marek's
> > > case), it does have an impact on suspend order:
> > >   - Before this commit:
> > >       1. The keyboard (gpio-keys) is suspended, and calls
> > >          enable_irq_wake() to inform the upstream interrupt controller
> > >          (INTC) that it is part of the wake-up path,
> > >       2. INTC is suspended, and calls device_set_wakeup_path() to inform
> > >          the device core that it must be kept enabled,
> > >       3. The system is woken by pressing a wake-up key.
> > >
> > >   - After this commit:
> > >       1. INTC is suspended, and is not aware it is part of the wake-up
> > >          path, so it is disabled by the device core,
> > >       2. gpio-keys is suspended, and calls enable_irq_wake() in vain,
> > >       3. Pressing a wake-up key has no effect, as INTC is disabled, and
> > >          the interrupt does not come through.
> > >
> > > It looks like no device links are involved, as both gpio-keys and INTC have
> > > no links.
> > > Do you have a clue?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> >
> > That patch of mine defers probe on all devices added by the
> > of_platform_default_populate() call, and then once the call returns,
> > it immediately triggers a deferred probe.
> >
> > So all these devices are being probed in parallel in the deferred
> > probe workqueue while the main "initcall thread" continues down to
> > further initcalls. It looks like some of the drivers in subsequent
> > initcalls are assuming that devices in the earlier initcalls always
> > probe and can't be deferred?
> >
> > There are two options.
> > 1. Fix these drivers.
> > 2. Add a "flush deferred workqueue" in fw_devlink_resume()
> >
> > I'd rather we fix the drivers so that they handle deferred probes
> > correctly. Thoughts?
>
> While the affected drivers should handle deferred probe fine, none of
> the affected drivers is subject to deferred probing: they all probe
> successfully on first try (I had added debug prints to
> platform_drv_probe() to be sure).
> The affected drivers are still probed in the same order (INTC is one of
> the earliest drivers probed, gpio-keys is the last).

Thanks, this is useful info. Now I know that my patch isn't somehow
reordering devices that would have probed as soon as
of_platform_default_populate_init() added them.

When you say the "The affected drivers are still probed in the same
order", are you only referring to the devices that would have probed
before of_platform_default_populate_init() returns? Or ALL devices in
the system are probing in the same order?

I assume gpio-keys gets probed in the "normal init thread" and not by
the deferred probe workqueue? I'm guessing this because gpio_keys
driver seems to register during late_initcall() whereas
of_platform_default_populate_init() runs as an arch_initcall_sync().

> However, during
> system suspend, gpio-keys is suspended before INTC, which is wrong, as
> gpio-keys uses an interrupt provided by INTC.
>
> Perhaps the "in parallel" is the real culprit, and there is a race
> condition somewhere?

I tried digging into the gpio_keys driver code to see how it interacts
with INTC and if gpio-keys defers probe if INTC hasn't probed yet. But
it seems like a rabbit hole that'd be easier to figure out when you
have the device. Can you check if gpio-keys is probing before INTC in
the "bad" case?

Also, in general, can you see if there's a difference in the probe
order between all the devices in the system? Adding a log to
really_probe() would be better in case non-platform devices are
getting reordered (my change affects all devices that are created from
DT, not just platform devices).

I want to make sure we understand the real issue before we try to fix it.

Thanks,
Saravana

  reply	other threads:[~2020-06-18 23:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-15  5:34 [PATCH v1 0/4] Optimize fw_devlink parsing Saravana Kannan
2020-05-15  5:34 ` [PATCH v1 1/4] driver core: Move code to the right part of the file Saravana Kannan
2020-05-15  5:34 ` [PATCH v1 2/4] driver core: Look for waiting consumers only for a fwnode's primary device Saravana Kannan
2020-05-15  5:34 ` [PATCH v1 3/4] driver core: fw_devlink: Add support for batching fwnode parsing Saravana Kannan
2020-05-15  5:35 ` [PATCH v1 4/4] of: platform: Batch fwnode parsing when adding all top level devices Saravana Kannan
     [not found]   ` <CGME20200519062510eucas1p27bc59da66e1b77534855103a27f87452@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
2020-05-19  6:25     ` Marek Szyprowski
2020-05-19  6:48       ` Saravana Kannan
2020-05-19  7:11         ` Marek Szyprowski
2020-05-19 10:32           ` Marek Szyprowski
2020-05-19 18:02             ` Saravana Kannan
2020-05-20  4:21               ` Marek Szyprowski
2020-06-17 12:20   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-06-17 18:36     ` Saravana Kannan
2020-06-18  7:31       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-06-18 23:00         ` Saravana Kannan [this message]
2020-06-19 12:24           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-06-19 20:07             ` Saravana Kannan
2020-06-20  2:32               ` Saravana Kannan
2020-06-22 15:49                 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-06-24 23:22                   ` Saravana Kannan
2020-05-15  8:52 ` [PATCH v1 0/4] Optimize fw_devlink parsing Saravana Kannan
2020-05-15 14:36   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAGETcx-rHFthf-aLb_S-ST6Evozvgis5XX5u0LNxyvfMoJOLKQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=saravanak@google.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=ji.luo@nxp.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.