On 21 June 2017 at 23:42, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> In some cases a driver for an ACPI device needs to be able to prevent the
>> ACPI PM domain from using the direct_complete path during system sleep.
>>
>> One typical case is when the driver for the device needs its device to stay
>> runtime enabled, during the __device_suspend phase. This isn't the case
>> when the direct_complete path is being executed by the PM core, as it then
>> disables runtime PM for the device in __device_suspend(). Any following
>> attempts to runtime resume the device after that point, just fails.
>>
>> A workaround to this problem is to let the driver runtime resume its device
>> from its ->prepare() callback, as that would prevent the direct_complete
>> path from being executed. However, that may often be a waste, especially if
>> it turned out that no one really needed the device.
>>
>> For this reason, invent acpi_dev_disable|enable_direct_complete(), to allow
>> drivers to inform the ACPI PM domain to change its default behaviour during
>> system sleep, and thus control whether it may use the direct_complete path
>> or not.
>>
>> Typically a driver should call acpi_dev_disable_direct_comlete() during
>> ->probe() and acpi_dev_enable_direct_complete() in ->remove().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/device_pm.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 1 +
>> include/linux/acpi.h | 4 ++++
>> 3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
>> index ee51e75..2393a1a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
>> @@ -879,6 +879,41 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_subsys_runtime_resume);
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>> /**
>> + * acpi_dev_disable_direct_complete - Disable the direct_complete path for ACPI.
>> + * @dev: Device to disable the path for.
>> + *
>> + * Per default the ACPI PM domain tries to use the direct_complete path for its
>> + * devices during system sleep. This function allows a user, typically a driver
>> + * during probe, to disable the direct_complete path from being used by ACPI.
>> + */
>> +void acpi_dev_disable_direct_complete(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(dev);
>> +
>> + if (adev)
>> + adev->no_direct_complete = true;
>
> We have an analogous flag in PCI now and it is called needs_resume, so
> it would be good to be consistent with that.
I was trying to come up with a nice name, however I couldn't find
anything better than no_direct_complete.
However as the next patch somewhat, extends the flag to also be use
for the runtime PM centric path, I should perhaps choose something
more related to that?
I think make "needs_resume" is going to e bit confusing, especially
while extending the usage for the flag it in the next patch, no?
>
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_disable_direct_complete);
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * acpi_dev_enable_direct_complete - Enable the direct_complete path for ACPI.
>> + * @dev: Device to enable the path for.
>> + *
>> + * Enable the direct_complete path to be used during system suspend for the ACPI
>> + * PM domain, which is the default option. Typically a driver that disabled the
>> + * path during ->probe(), must call this function during ->remove() to re-enable
>> + * the direct_complete path to be used by ACPI.
>> + */
>> +void acpi_dev_enable_direct_complete(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(dev);
>> +
>> + if (adev)
>> + adev->no_direct_complete = false;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_enable_direct_complete);
>> +
>> +/**
>> * acpi_dev_suspend_late - Put device into a low-power state using ACPI.
>> * @dev: Device to put into a low-power state.
>> *
>> @@ -967,7 +1002,7 @@ int acpi_subsys_prepare(struct device *dev)
>> if (ret < 0)
>> return ret;
>>
>> - if (!adev || !pm_runtime_suspended(dev))
>> + if (!adev || adev->no_direct_complete || !pm_runtime_suspended(dev))
>> return 0;
>>
>> return !acpi_dev_needs_resume(dev, adev);
>> diff --git a/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h b/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
>> index 63a90a6..2293d24 100644
>> --- a/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
>> +++ b/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
>> @@ -380,6 +380,7 @@ struct acpi_device {
>> struct list_head physical_node_list;
>> struct mutex physical_node_lock;
>> void (*remove)(struct acpi_device *);
>> + bool no_direct_complete;
>
> Also what about adding this to struct acpi_device_power instead?
Yes, thanks for the suggestion!
>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
Kind regards
Uffe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
