All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org
Cc: "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: runtime PM usage_count during driver_probe_device()?
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 07:44:19 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d3hu6oxo.fsf__36956.9148555913$1309531707$gmane$org@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k4c3dktm.fsf@ti.com> (Kevin Hilman's message of "Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:19:01 -0700")

Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> writes:

[...]

>     If the device bus type's or driver's ->probe() or ->remove()
>     callback runs pm_runtime_suspend() or pm_runtime_idle() or their
>     asynchronous counterparts, they will fail returning -EAGAIN, because
>     the device's usage counter is incremented by the core before
>     executing ->probe() and ->remove().  Still, it may be desirable to
>     suspend the device as soon as ->probe() or ->remove() has finished,
>     so the PM core uses pm_runtime_idle_sync() to invoke the
>     subsystem-level idle callback for the device at that time.

[...]

> Another curiosity is that, contrary to the above documentation, there is
> no usage_count increment before the bus/driver ->remove() (although
> there is a _get_sync/_put_sync around the sysfs_remove and notifier just
> before the bus/driver->remove().

OK, so the ->probe() part has been explained and makes sense, but I
would expect ->remove() to be similarily protected (as the documentation
states.)  But that is not the case.  Is that a bug?  If so, patch below
makes the code match the documentation.

Kevin

>From eef73ab2feb203bacb57dc35862f2a9969b61593 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 07:37:47 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] driver core: prevent runtime PM races with ->remove()

Runtime PM Documentation states that the runtime PM usage count is
incremented during driver ->probe() and ->remove().  This is designed
to prevent driver runtime PM races with subsystems which may initiate
runtime PM transitions before during and after drivers are loaded.

Current code increments the usage_count during ->probe() but not
during ->remove().  This patch fixes the ->remove() part and makes the
code match the documentation.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
---
 drivers/base/dd.c |    6 +++---
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
index 6658da7..47e079d 100644
--- a/drivers/base/dd.c
+++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
@@ -329,13 +329,13 @@ static void __device_release_driver(struct device *dev)
 			blocking_notifier_call_chain(&dev->bus->p->bus_notifier,
 						     BUS_NOTIFY_UNBIND_DRIVER,
 						     dev);
-
-		pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
-
 		if (dev->bus && dev->bus->remove)
 			dev->bus->remove(dev);
 		else if (drv->remove)
 			drv->remove(dev);
+
+		pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
+
 		devres_release_all(dev);
 		dev->driver = NULL;
 		klist_remove(&dev->p->knode_driver);
-- 
1.7.4

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-07-01 14:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-30 22:19 runtime PM usage_count during driver_probe_device()? Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01  0:09 ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01  0:09 ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01  0:33   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01  0:33   ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01  5:57     ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2011-07-01 14:46       ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01 14:46       ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01  5:57     ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2011-07-01 11:32     ` Ming Lei
2011-07-01 11:32     ` [linux-pm] " Ming Lei
2011-07-01 14:54   ` Alan Stern
2011-07-01 21:13     ` [PATCH] PM: prevent runtime_resume from racing with probe Alan Stern
2011-07-01 21:42       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01 14:54   ` runtime PM usage_count during driver_probe_device()? Alan Stern
2011-07-01 14:43 ` [linux-pm] " Alan Stern
2011-07-01 14:43 ` Alan Stern
2011-07-01 14:44 ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01 15:25   ` Alan Stern
2011-07-01 15:25   ` [linux-pm] " Alan Stern
2011-07-01 15:45     ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01 15:59       ` Alan Stern
2011-07-01 16:54         ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01 16:54         ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01 15:59       ` Alan Stern
2011-07-01 20:53       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01 20:53       ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01 21:12         ` Alan Stern
2011-07-01 21:44           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01 21:44           ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01 22:12           ` [PATCH] PM / Runtime: Update documentation regarding driver removal Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01 22:49             ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01 22:49             ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01 22:12           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01 21:12         ` runtime PM usage_count during driver_probe_device()? Alan Stern
2011-07-01 15:45     ` Kevin Hilman
2011-07-01 14:44 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2011-07-01 21:42 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-07-01 21:42 ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-06-30 22:19 Kevin Hilman

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='87d3hu6oxo.fsf__36956.9148555913$1309531707$gmane$org@ti.com' \
    --to=khilman@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.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.