On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 7:52 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 7:12 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 06:18:18PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 7:59 AM Uwe Kleine-König
> > > <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 08:56:19PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > [+cc Greg: new device_is_bound() use]
> > > >
> > > > ack, that's what I would have suggested now, too.
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 10:22:26PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > > > > pci_pm_runtime_resume() exits early when the device to resume isn't
> > > > > > bound yet:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if (!to_pci_driver(dev->driver))
> > > > > > return 0;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This however isn't true when the device currently probes and
> > > > > > local_pci_probe() calls pm_runtime_get_sync() because then the driver
> > > > > > core already setup dev->driver. As a result the driver's resume callback
> > > > > > is called before the driver's probe function is called and so more often
> > > > > > than not required driver data isn't setup yet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So replace the check for the device being unbound by a check that only
> > > > > > becomes true after .probe() succeeded.
> > > > >
> > > > > I like the fact that this patch is short and simple.
> > > > >
> > > > > But there are 30+ users of to_pci_driver(). This patch asserts that
> > > > > *one* of them, pci_pm_runtime_resume(), is special and needs to test
> > > > > device_is_bound() instead of using to_pci_driver().
> > > >
> > > > Maybe for the other locations using device_is_bound(&pdev->dev) instead
> > > > of to_pci_driver(pdev) != NULL would be nice, too?
> > > >
> > > > I have another doubt: device_is_bound() should (according to its
> > > > kernel-doc) be called with the device lock held. For the call stack that
> > > > is (maybe) fixed here, the lock is held (by __device_attach). We
> > > > probably should check if the lock is also held for the other calls of
> > > > pci_pm_runtime_resume().
> > > >
> > > > Hmm, the device lock is a mutex, the pm functions might be called in
> > > > atomic context, right?
> > > >
> > > > > It's special because the current PM implementation calls it via
> > > > > pm_runtime_get_sync() before the driver's .probe() method. That
> > > > > connection is a little bit obscure and fragile. What if the PM
> > > > > implementation changes?
> > > >
> > > > Maybe a saver bet would be to not use pm_runtime_get_sync() in
> > > > local_pci_probe()?
> > >
> > > Yes, in principle it might be replaced with pm_runtime_get_noresume().
> > >
> > > In theory, that may be problematic if a device is put into a low-power
> > > state on remove and then the driver is bound again to it.
> > >
> > > > I wonder if the same problem exists on remove, i.e. pci_device_remove()
> > > > calls pm_runtime_put_sync() after the driver's .remove() callback was
> > > > called.
> > >
> > > If it is called after ->remove() and before clearing the device's
> > > driver pointer, then yes.
> >
> > Yes, that is the case:
> >
> > pci_device_remove
> > if (drv->remove) {
> > pm_runtime_get_sync
> > drv->remove() # <-- driver ->remove() method
> > pm_runtime_put_noidle
> > }
> > ...
> > pm_runtime_put_sync # <-- after ->remove()
> >
> > So pm_runtime_put_sync() is called after drv->remove(), and it may
> > call drv->pm->runtime_idle(). I think the driver may not expect this.
> >
> > > If this is turned into pm_runtime_put_noidle(), all should work.
> >
> > pci_device_remove() already calls pm_runtime_put_noidle() immediately
> > after calling the driver ->remove() method.
> >
> > Are you saying we should do this, which means pci_device_remove()
> > would call pm_runtime_put_noidle() twice?
>
> Well, they are both needed to keep the PM-runtime reference counting in balance.
>
> This still has an issue, though, because user space would be able to
> trigger a runtime suspend via sysfs after we've dropped the last
> reference to the device in pci_device_remove().
>
> So instead, we can drop the pm_runtime_get_sync() and
> pm_runtime_put_sync() from local_pci_probe() and pci_device_remove(),
> respectively, and add pm_runtine_get_noresume() to pci_pm_init(),
> which will prevent PM-runtime from touching the device until it has a
> driver that supports PM-runtime.
>
> We'll lose the theoretical ability to put unbound devices into D3 this
> way, but we learned some time ago that this isn't safe in all cases
> anyway.
IOW, something like this (untested and most likely white-space-damaged).
---
drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 13 -------------
drivers/pci/pci.c | 7 +++++++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
@@ -309,16 +309,6 @@ static long local_pci_probe(void *_ddi)
struct device *dev = &pci_dev->dev;
int rc;
- /*
- * Unbound PCI devices are always put in D0, regardless of
- * runtime PM status. During probe, the device is set to
- * active and the usage count is incremented. If the driver
- * supports runtime PM, it should call pm_runtime_put_noidle(),
- * or any other runtime PM helper function decrementing the usage
- * count, in its probe routine and pm_runtime_get_noresume() in
- * its remove routine.
- */
- pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
pci_dev->driver = pci_drv;
rc = pci_drv->probe(pci_dev, ddi->id);
if (!rc)
@@ -470,9 +460,6 @@ static void pci_device_remove(struct dev
pci_iov_remove(pci_dev);
}
- /* Undo the runtime PM settings in local_pci_probe() */
- pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
-
/*
* If the device is still on, set the power state as "unknown",
* since it might change by the next time we load the driver.
Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/pci.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.c
@@ -3048,7 +3048,14 @@ void pci_pm_init(struct pci_dev *dev)
u16 pmc;
pm_runtime_forbid(&dev->dev);
+ /*
+ * Unbound PCI devices are always put in D0. If the driver supports
+ * runtime PM, it should call pm_runtime_put_noidle(), or any other
+ * runtime PM helper function decrementing the usage count, in its
+ * probe routine and pm_runtime_get_noresume() in its remove routine.
+ */
pm_runtime_set_active(&dev->dev);
+ pm_runtime_get_noresume(&dev->dev);
pm_runtime_enable(&dev->dev);
device_enable_async_suspend(&dev->dev);
dev->wakeup_prepared = false;
