From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn, Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@umn.edu>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
linux-tegra <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] media: staging: tegra-vde: fix runtime pm imbalance on error
Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 16:23:18 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200522132318.GM30374@kadam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200522131031.GL2163848@ulmo>
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 03:10:31PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 08:39:02PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 05:22:05PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:15 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:42:55AM +0800, dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn wrote:
> > > > > Hi, Dan,
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree the best solution is to fix __pm_runtime_resume(). But there are also
> > > > > many cases that assume pm_runtime_get_sync() will change PM usage
> > > > > counter on error. According to my static analysis results, the number of these
> > > > > "right" cases are larger. Adjusting __pm_runtime_resume() directly will introduce
> > > > > more new bugs. Therefore I think we should resolve the "bug" cases individually.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > That's why I was saying that we may need to introduce a new replacement
> > > > function for pm_runtime_get_sync() that works as expected.
> > > >
> > > > There is no reason why we have to live with the old behavior.
> > >
> > > What exactly do you mean by "the old behavior"?
> >
> > I'm suggesting we leave pm_runtime_get_sync() alone but we add a new
> > function which called pm_runtime_get_sync_resume() which does something
> > like this:
> >
> > static inline int pm_runtime_get_sync_resume(struct device *dev)
> > {
> > int ret;
> >
> > ret = __pm_runtime_resume(dev, RPM_GET_PUT);
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > pm_runtime_put(dev);
> > return ret;
> > }
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > I'm not sure if pm_runtime_put() is the correct thing to do? The other
> > thing is that this always returns zero on success. I don't know that
> > drivers ever care to differentiate between one and zero returns.
> >
> > Then if any of the caller expect that behavior we update them to use the
> > new function.
>
> Does that really have many benefits, though? I understand that this
> would perhaps be easier to use because it is more in line with how other
> functions operate. On the other hand, in some cases you may want to call
> a different version of pm_runtime_put() on failure, as discussed in
> other threads.
I wasn't CC'd on the other threads so I don't know. :/ I have always
assumed it was something like this but I don't know the details and
there is no documentation.
http://sweng.the-davies.net/Home/rustys-api-design-manifesto
You're essentially arguing that it's a #1 on Rusty's scale but ideally
we would want to be at #7.
>
> Even ignoring that issue, any existing callsites that are leaking the
> reference would have to be updated to call the new function, which would
> be pretty much the same amount of work as updating the callsites to fix
> the leak, right?
With the current API we're constantly adding bugs. I imagine that once
we add a straight forward default and some documentation then we will
solve this.
>
> So if instead we just fix up the leaks, we might have a case of an API
> that doesn't work as some of us (myself included) expected it, but at
> least it would be consistent. If we add another variant things become
> fragmented and therefore even more complicated to use and review.
That's the approach that we've been trying and it's clearly not working.
regards,
dan carpenter
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-22 13:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-20 9:51 [PATCH] media: staging: tegra-vde: fix runtime pm imbalance on error Dinghao Liu
2020-05-20 10:15 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2020-05-20 15:02 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-05-21 3:42 ` dinghao.liu
2020-05-21 9:15 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-05-21 15:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-05-21 17:39 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-05-22 13:10 ` Thierry Reding
2020-05-22 13:23 ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
2020-05-22 14:43 ` Thierry Reding
2020-05-28 12:08 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-05-28 12:31 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-05-21 17:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2020-05-20 20:15 ` kbuild test robot
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=20200522132318.GM30374@kadam \
--to=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=digetx@gmail.com \
--cc=dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=kjlu@umn.edu \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).