From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Martin Sperl <kernel@martin.sperl.org>,
linux-tegra <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Regression: spi: core: avoid waking pump thread from spi_sync instead run teardown delayed
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 16:09:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <313fc9d6-a142-91c2-8868-188bc70c019f@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190115151009.GC5522@sirena.org.uk>
On 15/01/2019 15:10, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 02:26:02PM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote:
>
>> It seems that __spi_pump_messages() is getting called several times
>> during boot when registering the spi-flash, then after the spi-flash has
>> been registered, about a 1 sec later spi_pump_idle_teardown() is called
>> (as expected), but exits because 'ctlr->running' is true. However,
>> spi_pump_idle_teardown() is never called again and when we suspend we
>> are stuck in the busy/running state. In this case should something be
>> scheduling spi_pump_idle_teardown() again? Although even if it does I
>> don't see where the busy flag would be cleared in this path?
>
> Right, I think with the current code we just shouldn't be checking for
> busy in teardown, since there's now a fairly big delay between idle and
> actually turning the hardware off the name is just super misleading and
> the logic confused. I don't have time to test right now but does
> something like the below which changes it to a flag for the hardware
> being powered up work:
I tried your change but the same problem still persists.
Cheers
Jon
--
nvpublic
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-15 16:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-14 15:35 Regression: spi: core: avoid waking pump thread from spi_sync instead run teardown delayed Jon Hunter
[not found] ` <7C4A5EFC-8235-40C8-96E1-E6020529DF72@martin.sperl.org>
2019-01-15 14:26 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-15 15:10 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-15 16:09 ` Jon Hunter [this message]
2019-01-15 19:27 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-15 17:39 ` kernel
2019-01-15 19:26 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-15 20:58 ` Martin Sperl
2019-01-15 21:25 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-16 11:01 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-18 17:11 ` kernel
2019-01-18 19:12 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-20 11:24 ` kernel
2019-01-23 17:56 ` Mark Brown
2019-05-09 19:47 ` Martin Sperl
2019-05-12 8:54 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-16 10:58 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-22 9:36 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
[not found] ` <CGME20190123082650eucas1p243ce21346a00e9b3e9eed2863cd3d280@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
2019-01-23 8:26 ` Marek Szyprowski
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=313fc9d6-a142-91c2-8868-188bc70c019f@nvidia.com \
--to=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@martin.sperl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.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 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).