On Thursday 13 April 2017 08:46 PM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 01:32:35PM +0530, Keerthy wrote:
>> thermal_zone_device_check --> thermal_zone_device_update -->
>> handle_thermal_trip --> handle_critical_trips --> orderly_poweroff
>>
>> The above sequence happens every 250/500 mS based on the configuration.
>> The orderly_poweroff function is getting called every 250/500 mS.
>> With a full fledged file system it takes at least 5-10 Seconds to
>> power off gracefully.
>>
>> In that period due to the thermal_zone_device_check triggering
>> periodically the thermal work queues bombard with
>> orderly_poweroff calls multiple times eventually leading to
>> failures in gracefully powering off the system.
>>
>> Make sure that orderly_poweroff is called only once.
>>
>> Reported-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx>
>
> Was this reported by nm or found by you?
Okay i found it when i was debugging the problem reported by nm :-).
I will fix that.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@xxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>>
>> * Added a global mutex to serialize poweroff code sequence.
>>
>> drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c | 9 ++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c b/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
>> index 11f0675..7462ae5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c
>> @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
>>
>> static DEFINE_MUTEX(thermal_list_lock);
>> static DEFINE_MUTEX(thermal_governor_lock);
>> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(poweroff_lock);
>>
>> static atomic_t in_suspend;
>>
>> @@ -326,6 +327,7 @@ static void handle_critical_trips(struct thermal_zone_device *tz,
>> int trip, enum thermal_trip_type trip_type)
>> {
>> int trip_temp;
>> + static bool power_off_triggered;
>>
>> tz->ops->get_trip_temp(tz, trip, &trip_temp);
>>
>> @@ -338,11 +340,14 @@ static void handle_critical_trips(struct thermal_zone_device *tz,
>> if (tz->ops->notify)
>> tz->ops->notify(tz, trip, trip_type);
>>
>> - if (trip_type == THERMAL_TRIP_CRITICAL) {
>> + if (trip_type == THERMAL_TRIP_CRITICAL && !power_off_triggered) {
>> dev_emerg(&tz->device,
>> "critical temperature reached(%d C),shutting down\n",
>> tz->temperature / 1000);
>> + mutex_lock(&poweroff_lock);
>> orderly_poweroff(true);
>> + power_off_triggered = true;
>> + mutex_unlock(&poweroff_lock);
>
> The above code does not fully prevent orderly_poweroff() to be called
> only once, does it?
>
> - thermal zone 0 goes all the way in the critical path, but gets
> preempted between orderly_poweroff(true)l and power_off_triggered =
> true;, i.e., preempted right before setting to true, therefore,
> power_off_triggered still 0.
> - thermal zone 1 also enters critical path, but will sleep at the
> power_off_lock, right?
> - then thermal zone 0 gets the CPU again, finishes the critical path,
> unlocks poweroff_lock.
> - thermal zone 1 is unblocked, and call again orderly_poweroff(true);
Oh yes! I will fix that
if (trip_type == THERMAL_TRIP_CRITICAL) {
dev_emerg(&tz->device,
"critical temperature reached(%d C),shutting
down\n",tz->temperature / 1000);
mutex_lock(&poweroff_lock);
if (!power_off_triggered) {
orderly_poweroff(true);
power_off_triggered = true;
}
mutex_unlock(&poweroff_lock);
}
The above should take care.
>
>
>
> BR,
>> }
>> }
>>
>> @@ -1463,6 +1468,7 @@ static int __init thermal_init(void)
>> {
>> int result;
>>
>> + mutex_init(&poweroff_lock);
>> result = thermal_register_governors();
>> if (result)
>> goto error;
>> @@ -1497,6 +1503,7 @@ static int __init thermal_init(void)
>> ida_destroy(&thermal_cdev_ida);
>> mutex_destroy(&thermal_list_lock);
>> mutex_destroy(&thermal_governor_lock);
>> + mutex_destroy(&poweroff_lock);
>> return result;
>> }
>>
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
