On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 09:23:53AM +0800, Can Guo wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
> On 2020-11-21 00:35, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 12:37:22AM -0800, Can Guo wrote:
> > > Runtime resume is handled by runtime PM framework, no need to forcibly
> > > set runtime PM status to RPM_ACTIVE during system resume/thaw/restore.
> >
> > Sorry, I don't understand this explanation at all.
> >
> > Sure, runtime resume is handled by the runtime PM framework. But this
> > patch changes the code for system resume, which is completely different.
> >
> > Following a system resume, the hardware will be at full power. We don't
> > want the kernel to think that the device is still in runtime suspend;
> > otherwise is would never put the device back into low-power mode.
>
> How about adding below lines to the patch?
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_pm.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_pm.c
> index 908f27f..7ebe582 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_pm.c
> @@ -75,9 +75,11 @@ static int scsi_dev_type_resume(struct device *dev,
> const struct dev_pm_ops *pm = dev->driver ? dev->driver->pm : NULL;
> int err = 0;
>
> - err = cb(dev, pm);
> - scsi_device_resume(to_scsi_device(dev));
> - dev_dbg(dev, "scsi resume: %d\n", err);
> + if (pm_runtime_active(dev)) {
> + err = cb(dev, pm);
> + scsi_device_resume(to_scsi_device(dev));
> + dev_dbg(dev, "scsi resume: %d\n", err);
> + }
>
> return err;
> }
>
> Whenever a device is accessed, the issuer or somewhere in the path
> should do something like pm_runtime_get_sync (e.g. in sg_open()) or
> pm_runtime_resume() (e.g. in blk_queue_enter()), in either sync or
> async way. After the job (read/write/ioctl or whatever) is done,
> either a pm_runtime_put_sync() or auto runtime suspend puts the device
> back into runtime suspended/low-power mode. Since the func
> scsi_bus_suspend_common() does nothing if device is already in runtime
> suspended mode, scsi_dev_type_resume() should only resume the device
> if it is runtime active.
You're starting to think along the right lines, but you are ignoring all
the other work that people have already done for handling these cases.
Please read Documentation/driver-api/pm/devices.rst very carefully,
especially the parts about returning a positive value from the ->prepare
callback (also known as "direct-complete" and related to the
DPM_FLAG_NO_DIRECT_COMPLETE and DPM_FLAG_SMART_PREPARE flags) and the
parts about the DPM_FLAG_SMART_SUSPEND and DPM_FLAG_MAY_SKIP_RESUME
flags. Then think about what you want to accomplish and write a patch
that takes all this information into account.
Key point: At no time should any part of the kernel think that the
device is in a low-power state when it is actually in a high-power
state, or vice versa.
Alan Stern
