From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> Cc: linux-i2c <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, "Mani, Rajmohan" <rajmohan.mani@intel.com>, Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] ACPI: Add a convenience function to tell a device is suspended in probe Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 11:09:46 +0200 Message-ID: <20200121090946.GX5440@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0hfGateSt-_EBuyHqLYi5NR4PUFB=wDF+Gu+9-tFXuohg@mail.gmail.com> Hi Rafael, Thank you for the review. On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 11:41:12AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 4:44 PM Sakari Ailus > <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > Add a convenience function to tell whether a device is suspended for probe > > or remove, for busses where the custom is that drivers don't need to > > resume devices in probe, or suspend them in their remove handlers. > > > > Returns false on non-ACPI systems. > > > > Suggested-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/acpi/device_pm.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > include/linux/acpi.h | 5 +++++ > > 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c > > index 5e4a8860a9c0c..87393020276d8 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c > > @@ -1348,4 +1348,39 @@ int acpi_dev_pm_attach(struct device *dev, bool power_on) > > return 1; > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_pm_attach); > > + > > +/** > > + * acpi_dev_low_power_state_probe - Tell if a device is in a low power state > > "Check the current ACPI power state of a device." Sounds good. > > > + * during probe > > Why is this limited to probe? Well.. that was the purpose. It could be used at other times, too, I guess, but most of the time runtime PM is the right interface for doing that. > > The function actually checks whether or not the ACPI power state of > the device is low-power at the call time (except that it is a bit racy > with respect to _set_power(), so it may not work as expected if called > in parallel with that one). > > Maybe drop the "probe" part of the name (actually, I would call this > function acpi_dev_state_low_power()) and add a paragraph about the > potential race with _set_power() to the description? Agreed, I'll use the text you provided below. > > > + * @dev: The device > > "Physical device the ACPI power state of which to check". Ok. > > > + * > > + * Tell whether a given device is in a low power state during the driver's probe > > + * or remove operation. > > + * > > + * Drivers of devices on certain busses such as I²C can generally assume (on > > + * ACPI based systems) that the devices they control are powered on without > > + * driver having to do anything about it. Using struct > > + * device_driver.probe_low_power and "probe-low-power" property, this can be > > + * negated and the driver has full control of the device power management. > > The above information belongs somewhere else in my view. How about putting it to the DSD ReST property documentation, perhaps with a little bit more context? I can add another patch for that. > > > + * Always returns false on non-ACPI based systems. True is returned on ACPI > > "On a system without ACPI, return false. On a system with ACPI, > return true if the current ACPI power state of the device is not D0, > or false otherwise. > > Note that the power state of a device is not well-defined after it has > been passed to acpi_device_set_power() and before that function > returns, so it is not valid to ask for the ACPI power state of the > device in that time frame." Works for me. > > > + * based systems iff the device is in a low power state during probe or remove. > > + */ > > +bool acpi_dev_low_power_state_probe(struct device *dev) > > +{ > > + int power_state; > > + int ret; > > + > > + if (!is_acpi_device_node(dev_fwnode(dev))) > > + return false; > > This is (at least) inefficient, because the same check is repeated by > ACPI_COMPANION(). > > If you really want to print the message, it is better to do something like > > struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(dev); > > if (!adev) > return false; > > ret = acpi_device_get_power(adev, &power_state); Yes, makes sense. > > > + > > + ret = acpi_device_get_power(ACPI_COMPANION(dev), &power_state); > > + if (ret) { > > + dev_warn(dev, "Cannot obtain power state (%d)\n", ret); > > And the log level of this message is way too high IMO. > > This means a firmware bug AFAICS and so after seeing it once on a > given system it becomes noise. I'd use pr_debug() to print it. I'll switch to dev_dbg() then --- as we have the device. > > > + return false; > > + } > > + > > + return power_state != ACPI_STATE_D0; > > +} > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_low_power_state_probe); > > + > > #endif /* CONFIG_PM */ -- Kind regards, Sakari Ailus
next prev parent reply index Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-01-09 15:45 [PATCH v3 0/5] Support running driver's probe for a device powered off Sakari Ailus 2020-01-09 15:45 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] i2c: Allow driver to manage the device's power state during probe Sakari Ailus 2020-01-09 15:45 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] ACPI: Add a convenience function to tell a device is suspended in probe Sakari Ailus 2020-01-13 10:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2020-01-21 9:09 ` Sakari Ailus [this message] 2020-01-21 16:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2020-01-09 15:45 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] ov5670: Support probe whilst the device is in a low power state Sakari Ailus 2020-01-09 15:45 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] media: i2c: imx319: Support probe while the device is off Sakari Ailus 2020-01-09 15:45 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] at24: Support probing while off Sakari Ailus 2020-01-10 11:16 ` Bartosz Golaszewski 2020-01-10 11:28 ` Sakari Ailus 2020-01-10 11:31 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
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=20200121090946.GX5440@paasikivi.fi.intel.com \ --to=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \ --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=rafael@kernel.org \ --cc=rajmohan.mani@intel.com \ --cc=tfiga@chromium.org \ --cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \ /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
Linux-ACPI Archive on lore.kernel.org Archives are clonable: git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/0 linux-acpi/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 linux-acpi linux-acpi/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi \ linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org public-inbox-index linux-acpi Example config snippet for mirrors Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git