On Thursday, 11 of September 2008, Shaohua Li wrote:
> pci subsystem wakeup handler.
Perhaps add a bit more explanation here - what is introduced, why and why this
particular way.
> ---
> drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 95 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/pci.h | 6 ++
> 2 files changed, 101 insertions(+)
>
> Index: linux/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c 2008-09-11 10:56:26.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c 2008-09-11 11:15:20.000000000 +0800
> @@ -472,12 +472,106 @@ static int pci_pm_resume_noirq(struct de
> return error;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Called when dev is suspected to invoke a wakeup event, return 0 if yes
> + * */
Use kerneldoc format of the comment, please.
> +static bool pci_handle_one_wakeup_event(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
I don't really like that being a boolean function. I'd make it return 0 on
success and error code on failure.
> + int pme_pos = pdev->pm_cap;
> + struct pci_driver *drv = pdev->driver;
> + u16 pmcsr;
> + bool spurious = false;
> +
> + if (pme_pos == 0) {
> + /*
> + * Some USB devices haven't PME, but have specific registers to
> + * control wakeup
> + */
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + /* clear PME status and disable PME to avoid interrupt flood */
> + pci_read_config_word(pdev, pme_pos + PCI_PM_CTRL, &pmcsr);
> + if (!(pmcsr & PCI_PM_CTRL_PME_STATUS))
> + return false;
> + /* I see spurious PME here, just ignore it for now */
> + if (!(pmcsr & PCI_PM_CTRL_PME_ENABLE))
> + spurious = true;
> + else
> + pmcsr &= ~PCI_PM_CTRL_PME_ENABLE;
If you do this unconditionally, you'll be able to use pci_pme_active() for it.
Actually, you can use pci_pme_enabled() for checking if PME is enabled
and pci_pme_status() for checking if the PME status is set. Then,
you can remove the reference to the config space from here and use
those low-level callbacks instead of them.
> + pmcsr |= PCI_PM_CTRL_PME_STATUS;
> + pci_write_config_word(pdev, pme_pos + PCI_PM_CTRL, pmcsr);
> +
> + if (spurious)
> + return false;
> + return true;
> +out:
> + if (drv && drv->pm && drv->pm->base.wakeup_event)
> + return drv->pm->base.wakeup_event(&pdev->dev);
I'd move this into the 'if (!pme_pos)' block. And is this what we want really?
In this case the driver's wakeup_event() will be responsible for checking
if the wake-up event is valid etc.
> + return false;
> +}
> +
Please add a kerneldoc comment and I don't like bool here too.
> +bool pci_handle_wakeup_event(struct pci_dev *target)
> +{
> + bool ret;
> + struct pci_dev *tmp = NULL;
> + int domain_nr, bus_start, bus_end;
> +
> + /*
> + * @target could be a bridge or a device.
> + * PCIe native PME case:
> + * @target is device - @target must be the exact device invoking PME
> + * @target is a root port or pcie-pci bridge - should scan legacy pci
> + * devices under the bridge
> + * ACPI GPE case:
> + * @target is device - AML code could clear PME status before this
> + * routine is called, so we can't detect if @target invokes PME.
> + * Let's trust AML code
> + * @target is bridge - scan devices under the bridge
> + * So: if target is device, trust the device invokes PME. If target is
> + * bridge, scan devices under the bridge and only trust device invokes
> + * PME which we can detect
> + **/
Change this comment into a kerneldoc one before the function, please.
> + ret = pci_handle_one_wakeup_event(target);
> + if (!target->subordinate || (target->is_pcie &&
> + target->pcie_type != PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT &&
> + target->pcie_type != PCI_EXP_TYPE_PCI_BRIDGE)) {
> + /* always trust the device invokes PME even we can't detect */
More details in the comment, please.
> + device_receive_wakeup_event(&target->dev);
Why do we use device_receive_wakeup_event() here?
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + if (ret)
> + device_receive_wakeup_event(&target->dev);
And here? What's the idea?
> +
> + domain_nr = pci_domain_nr(target->bus);
> + bus_start = target->subordinate->secondary;
> + bus_end = target->subordinate->subordinate;
> + while ((tmp = pci_get_device(PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, tmp)) != NULL) {
> + if (pci_domain_nr(tmp->bus) == domain_nr &&
> + tmp->bus->number >= bus_start &&
> + tmp->bus->number <= bus_end) {
This cascading 'if ()'s don't look good. I'd probably use 'continue'.
> + if (pci_handle_one_wakeup_event(tmp)) {
> + ret = true;
> + device_receive_wakeup_event(&tmp->dev);
What exactly is the role of device_receive_wakeup_event() here?
> + }
> + }
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_handle_wakeup_event);
> +
> +static bool pci_pm_wakeup_event(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + return pci_handle_wakeup_event(to_pci_dev(dev));
> +}
What exactly is the point of introducing this function?
> #else /* !CONFIG_SUSPEND */
>
> #define pci_pm_suspend NULL
> #define pci_pm_suspend_noirq NULL
> #define pci_pm_resume NULL
> #define pci_pm_resume_noirq NULL
> +#define pci_pm_wakeup_event NULL
>
> #endif /* !CONFIG_SUSPEND */
>
> @@ -651,6 +745,7 @@ struct pm_ext_ops pci_pm_ops = {
> .thaw = pci_pm_thaw,
> .poweroff = pci_pm_poweroff,
> .restore = pci_pm_restore,
> + .wakeup_event = pci_pm_wakeup_event,
> },
> .suspend_noirq = pci_pm_suspend_noirq,
> .resume_noirq = pci_pm_resume_noirq,
> Index: linux/include/linux/pci.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/include/linux/pci.h 2008-09-11 10:56:26.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux/include/linux/pci.h 2008-09-11 10:56:42.000000000 +0800
> @@ -646,6 +646,7 @@ int pci_enable_wake(struct pci_dev *dev,
> pci_power_t pci_target_state(struct pci_dev *dev);
> int pci_prepare_to_sleep(struct pci_dev *dev);
> int pci_back_from_sleep(struct pci_dev *dev);
> +bool pci_handle_wakeup_event(struct pci_dev *target);
>
> /* Functions for PCI Hotplug drivers to use */
> int pci_bus_find_capability(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, int cap);
> @@ -949,6 +950,11 @@ static inline int pci_enable_wake(struct
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static inline bool pci_handle_wakeup_event(struct pci_dev *target)
> +{
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> static inline int pci_request_regions(struct pci_dev *dev, const char *res_name)
> {
> return -EIO;
>
Thanks,
Rafael
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
