Note to self: avoid replying to technical messages late in the night ...
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 11:32 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Saturday, April 11, 2020 4:41:14 AM CEST Alan Stern wrote:
> > Okay, this is my attempt to summarize what we have been discussing.
> > But first: There is a dev_pm_skip_resume() helper routine which
> > subsystems can call to see whether resume-side _early and _noirq driver
> > callbacks should be skipped. But there is no corresponding
> > dev_pm_skip_suspend() helper routine. Let's add one, or rename
> > dev_pm_smart_suspend_and_suspended() to dev_pm_skip_suspend().
>
> OK
>
> > Given that, here's my understanding of what should happen. (I'm
> > assuming the direct_complete mechanism is not being used.) This tries
> > to describe what we _want_ to happen, which is not always the same as
> > what the current code actually _does_.
>
> OK
>
> > During the suspend side, for each of the
> > {suspend,freeze,poweroff}_{late,noirq} phases: If
> > dev_pm_skip_suspend() returns true then the subsystem should
> > not invoke the driver's callback, and if there is no subsystem
> > callback then the core will not invoke the driver's callback.
> >
> > During the resume side, for each of the
> > {resume,thaw,restore}_{early,noirq} phases: If
> > dev_pm_skip_resume() returns true then the subsystem should
> > not invoke the driver's callback, and if there is no subsystem
> > callback then the core will not invoke the driver's callback.
> >
> > dev_pm_skip_suspend() will return "true" if SMART_SUSPEND is
> > set and the device's runtime status is "suspended".
>
> Agreed with the above.
>
> > power.must_resume gets set following the suspend-side _noirq
> > phase if power.usage_count > 1 (indicating the device was
> > in active use before the start of the sleep transition) or
> > power.must_resume is set for any of the device's dependents.
>
> Or MAY_SKIP_RESUME is unset (which means that the driver does not
> allow its resume callbacks to be skipped), or power.may_skip_resume
> is unset (which means that the subsystem does not allow the
> driver callbacks to be skipped).
>
> > dev_pm_skip_resume() will return "false" if the current
> > transition is RESTORE or power.must_resume is set. Otherwise:
> > It will return true if the current transition is THAW,
> > SMART_SUSPEND is set, and the device's runtime status is
> > "suspended".
>
> The other way around. That is:
>
> dev_pm_skip_resume() will return "true" if the current transition is
> THAW and dev_pm_skip_suspend() returns "true" for that device (so
> SMART_SUSPEND is set, and the device's runtime status is "suspended",
> as per the definition of that function above).
The above is what I wanted to say ->
> Otherwise, it will return "true" if the current transition is RESTORE
> (which means that all devices are resumed) or power.must_resume is not
> set (so this particular device need not be resumed).
-> but this isn't. In particular, I messed up the RESTORE part, so it
should read:
Otherwise, it will return "true" if the current transition is *not*
RESTORE (in which case all devices would be resumed) *and*
power.must_resume is not set (so this particular device need not be
resumed).
Sorry about that.
> > It will return "true" if the current transition is
> > RESUME, SMART_SUSPEND and MAY_SKIP_RESUME are both set, and
> > the device's runtime status is "suspended".
>
> Unless MAY_SKIP_RESUME is unset for at least one of its descendants (or
> dependent devices).
That should include the power.may_skip_resume flag, so as to read as follows:
Unless MAY_SKIP_RESUME is unset or power.may_skip_resume is unset for
at least one of its descendants (or dependent devices).
> > For a RESUME
> > transition, it will also return "true" if MAY_SKIP_RESUME and
> > power.may_skip_resume are both set, regardless of
> > SMART_SUSPEND or the current runtime status.
>
> And if the device was not in active use before suspend (as per its usage
> counter) or MAY_SKIP_RESUME is unset for at least one of its descendants (or
> dependent devices in general).
And analogously here, so what I really should have written is:
And if the device was not in active use before suspend (as per its
usage counter) or MAY_SKIP_RESUME or power.may_skip_resume is unset
for at least one of its descendants (or dependent devices in general).
> > At the start of the {resume,thaw,restore}_noirq phase, if
> > dev_pm_skip_resume() returns true then the core will set the
> > runtime status to "suspended". Otherwise it will set the
> > runtime status to "active". If this is not what the subsystem
> > or driver wants, it must update the runtime status itself.
>
> Right.
>
> > Comments and differences with respect to the code in your pm-sleep-core
> > branch:
> >
> > I'm not sure whether we should specify other conditions for
> > setting power.must_resume.
>
> IMO we should.
In fact, this is part of the implementation and it helps to
"propagate" the "must resume" condition to the parent and the
first-order suppliers of the device (which is sufficient, because
their power.must_resume "propagates" in the same way and so on).
IOW, the important piece is what the return value of
dev_pm_skip_resume() should be in particular conditions and that
return value is computed with the help of power.must_resume (and it
might have been computed in a different, possibly less efficient,
way).
> Otherwise it is rather hard to catch the case in which one of the
> device's descendants has MAY_SKIP_RESUME unset (and so the device
> needs to be resumed).
>
> > dev_pm_skip_resume() doesn't compute the value described
> > above. I'm pretty sure the existing code is wrong.
>
> Well, we don't seem to have reached an agreement on some details
> above ...
Sorry for failing to be careful enough ...
