Hi,
Thank you for your patch.
On 2/12/24 10:24, Shyam Sundar S K wrote:
> TEE enact command failures are seen after each suspend/resume cycle;
> fix this by cancelling the policy builder workqueue before going into
> suspend and reschedule the workqueue after resume.
>
> [ 629.516792] ccp 0000:c2:00.2: tee: command 0x5 timed out, disabling PSP
> [ 629.516835] amd-pmf AMDI0102:00: TEE enact cmd failed. err: ffff000e, ret:0
> [ 630.550464] amd-pmf AMDI0102:00: AMD_PMF_REGISTER_RESPONSE:1
> [ 630.550511] amd-pmf AMDI0102:00: AMD_PMF_REGISTER_ARGUMENT:7
> [ 630.550548] amd-pmf AMDI0102:00: AMD_PMF_REGISTER_MESSAGE:16
>
> Fixes: ae82cef7d9c5 ("platform/x86/amd/pmf: Add support for PMF-TA interaction")
> Signed-off-by: Patil Rajesh Reddy <Patil.Reddy@xxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/core.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/core.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/core.c
> index feaa09f5b35a..be9edb849006 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/core.c
> @@ -296,6 +296,9 @@ static int amd_pmf_suspend_handler(struct device *dev)
> {
> struct amd_pmf_dev *pdev = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>
> + if (!pdev->smart_pc_enabled)
> + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&pdev->pb_work);
> +
These inverted checks are very confusing and this is all caused by this
enum which causes the smart_pc_enabled enabled bool to be inverted:
enum smart_pc_status {
PMF_SMART_PC_ENABLED,
PMF_SMART_PC_DISABLED,
};
Please do a preparation patch for this fix which:
1. Drops this broken enum, there is no need to have an enum for what
is simply a true/false case.
2. Replace PMF_SMART_PC_ENABLED with true, PMF_SMART_PC_DISABLED with false,
so that the contents of pdev->smart_pc_enabled actually matches its name
instead of being inverted.
3. Change the single existing smart_pc_enabled check from:
if (!dev->smart_pc_enabled) {
amd_pmf_deinit_smart_pc(dev);
Which is nonsensical code, if not enabled clean it up? Into
the much more sensible version of:
if (dev->smart_pc_enabled) {
amd_pmf_deinit_smart_pc(dev);
And then redo this patch on top of this preparation patch,
also replacing the "if (!dev->smart_pc_enabled)" checks
in this patch with "if (dev->smart_pc_enabled)" so that
the code actually makes sense to a casual reader.
Regards,
Hans
> kfree(pdev->buf);
>
> return 0;
> @@ -312,6 +315,9 @@ static int amd_pmf_resume_handler(struct device *dev)
> return ret;
> }
>
> + if (!pdev->smart_pc_enabled)
> + schedule_delayed_work(&pdev->pb_work, msecs_to_jiffies(2000));
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
