From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
To: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
Cc: Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com>,
alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, tiwai@suse.de,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com, hui.wang@canonical.com,
broonie@kernel.org, srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org,
jank@cadence.com, sanyog.r.kale@intel.com,
rander.wang@linux.intel.com, bard.liao@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] soundwire: bus: use sdw_update_no_pm when initializing a device
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 09:31:49 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <668b4d5c-d9eb-0256-ce26-df38e32cc520@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201207044334.GA8403@vkoul-mobl>
On 12/6/20 10:43 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 05-12-20, 08:59, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> Thanks for the review Vinod.
>>
>> On 12/5/20 1:45 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
>>> On 03-12-20, 04:46, Bard Liao wrote:
>>>> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> When a Slave device is resumed, it may resume the bus and restart the
>>>> enumeration. During that process, we absolutely don't want to call
>>>> regular read/write routines which will wait for the resume to
>>>> complete, otherwise a deadlock occurs.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 60ee9be25571 ('soundwire: bus: add PM/no-PM versions of read/write functions')
>>>
>>> Change looks okay, but not sure why this is a fix for adding no pm
>>> version?
>>
>> when we added the no_pm version, we missed the two cases below where
>> sdw_update() was used and that creates a deadlock. To me that's a conceptual
>> bug, we didn't fully use the no_pm versions, hence the Fixes tag.
>
> Documentation says:
> "A Fixes: tag indicates that the patch fixes an issue in a previous commit. It
> is used to make it easy to determine where a bug originated, which can help
> review a bug fix. This tag also assists the stable kernel team in determining
> which stable kernel versions should receive your fix. This is the preferred
> method for indicating a bug fixed by the patch. See :ref:`describe_changes`
> for more details."
>
> I do not this this helps here as this does not help distros etc
> I would say this is incremental development which improved a case not
> done properly earlier, unless you would like this to be backported.. In
> that case it helps folks...
IMHO the changes in the series are absolutely required to have a
reliable suspend-resume operation and will need to be back-ported. When
I said 'conceptual bug', I didn't mean a hypothetical case, I really
meant that a proven race condition and timeouts will occur. That's not
good... We will provide the list of this patches to distros that are
known to support SoundWire as a 'must apply'.
If you look at the series, we provided Fixes tags for all patches except
'cosmetic' ones which don't fundamentally change the behavior (Patch 3,
patch 7) or when the code has not reached Linus' tree (patch 5).
That said, 5.10 was the first release where SoundWire started to be
functional so there's no need to apply these patches to earlier versions
of the stable tree.
Does this help?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
To: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, tiwai@suse.de,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com, hui.wang@canonical.com,
broonie@kernel.org, srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org,
jank@cadence.com, sanyog.r.kale@intel.com,
Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com>,
rander.wang@linux.intel.com, bard.liao@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] soundwire: bus: use sdw_update_no_pm when initializing a device
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 09:31:49 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <668b4d5c-d9eb-0256-ce26-df38e32cc520@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201207044334.GA8403@vkoul-mobl>
On 12/6/20 10:43 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 05-12-20, 08:59, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> Thanks for the review Vinod.
>>
>> On 12/5/20 1:45 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
>>> On 03-12-20, 04:46, Bard Liao wrote:
>>>> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> When a Slave device is resumed, it may resume the bus and restart the
>>>> enumeration. During that process, we absolutely don't want to call
>>>> regular read/write routines which will wait for the resume to
>>>> complete, otherwise a deadlock occurs.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 60ee9be25571 ('soundwire: bus: add PM/no-PM versions of read/write functions')
>>>
>>> Change looks okay, but not sure why this is a fix for adding no pm
>>> version?
>>
>> when we added the no_pm version, we missed the two cases below where
>> sdw_update() was used and that creates a deadlock. To me that's a conceptual
>> bug, we didn't fully use the no_pm versions, hence the Fixes tag.
>
> Documentation says:
> "A Fixes: tag indicates that the patch fixes an issue in a previous commit. It
> is used to make it easy to determine where a bug originated, which can help
> review a bug fix. This tag also assists the stable kernel team in determining
> which stable kernel versions should receive your fix. This is the preferred
> method for indicating a bug fixed by the patch. See :ref:`describe_changes`
> for more details."
>
> I do not this this helps here as this does not help distros etc
> I would say this is incremental development which improved a case not
> done properly earlier, unless you would like this to be backported.. In
> that case it helps folks...
IMHO the changes in the series are absolutely required to have a
reliable suspend-resume operation and will need to be back-ported. When
I said 'conceptual bug', I didn't mean a hypothetical case, I really
meant that a proven race condition and timeouts will occur. That's not
good... We will provide the list of this patches to distros that are
known to support SoundWire as a 'must apply'.
If you look at the series, we provided Fixes tags for all patches except
'cosmetic' ones which don't fundamentally change the behavior (Patch 3,
patch 7) or when the code has not reached Linus' tree (patch 5).
That said, 5.10 was the first release where SoundWire started to be
functional so there's no need to apply these patches to earlier versions
of the stable tree.
Does this help?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-07 15:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-02 20:46 [PATCH 0/7] soundwire/regmap: use _no_pm routines Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` [PATCH 1/7] soundwire: bus: use sdw_update_no_pm when initializing a device Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` Bard Liao
2020-12-05 7:45 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-05 7:45 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-05 14:59 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-12-07 4:43 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-07 4:43 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-07 15:31 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart [this message]
2020-12-07 15:31 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-12-08 4:56 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-08 4:56 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-02 20:46 ` [PATCH 2/7] soundwire: bus: use sdw_write_no_pm when setting the bus scale registers Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` [PATCH 3/7] soundwire: bus: use no_pm IO routines for all interrupt handling Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` [PATCH 4/7] soundwire/regmap: use _no_pm functions in regmap_read/write Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` Bard Liao
2020-12-05 7:45 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-05 7:45 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-05 14:43 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-12-02 20:46 ` [PATCH 5/7] regmap: sdw: use no_pm routines for SoundWire 1.2 MBQ Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` Bard Liao
2020-12-05 7:46 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-05 7:46 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-05 14:52 ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
2020-12-05 16:31 ` Greg KH
2020-12-05 16:31 ` Greg KH
2020-12-07 4:47 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-07 4:47 ` Vinod Koul
2020-12-02 20:46 ` [PATCH 6/7] soundwire: bus: fix confusion on device used by pm_runtime Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` [PATCH 7/7] soundwire: bus: clarify dev_err/dbg device references Bard Liao
2020-12-02 20:46 ` Bard Liao
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=668b4d5c-d9eb-0256-ce26-df38e32cc520@linux.intel.com \
--to=pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=bard.liao@intel.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hui.wang@canonical.com \
--cc=jank@cadence.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rander.wang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=sanyog.r.kale@intel.com \
--cc=srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--cc=yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.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 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.