| Message ID | 1391529538-21685-6-git-send-email-ulf.hansson@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> writes: > Due to the available runtime PM callbacks, we are now able to put our > device into low power state at system suspend. > > Earlier we could not accomplish this without trusting a power domain > for the device to take care of it. Now we are able to cope with > scenarios both with and without a power domain. > > Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c > index c88da1c..074e0cb 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c > @@ -1723,33 +1723,38 @@ static int mmci_remove(struct amba_device *dev) > return 0; > } > > -#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND > -static int mmci_suspend(struct device *dev) > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP > +static int mmci_suspend_late(struct device *dev) > { > - struct amba_device *adev = to_amba_device(dev); > - struct mmc_host *mmc = amba_get_drvdata(adev); > + int ret = 0; > > - if (mmc) { > - struct mmci_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc); > - pm_runtime_get_sync(dev); > - writel(0, host->base + MMCIMASK0); > - } > + if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev)) > + return 0; > > - return 0; > + if (dev->pm_domain && dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_suspend) > + ret = dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_suspend(dev); > + else > + ret = dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend(dev); > + > + if (!ret) > + pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev); Isn't this basically open-coding pm_runtime_suspend()... > + return ret; > } > > -static int mmci_resume(struct device *dev) > +static int mmci_resume_early(struct device *dev) > { > - struct amba_device *adev = to_amba_device(dev); > - struct mmc_host *mmc = amba_get_drvdata(adev); > + int ret = 0; > > - if (mmc) { > - struct mmci_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc); > - writel(MCI_IRQENABLE, host->base + MMCIMASK0); > - pm_runtime_put(dev); > - } > + if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev)) > + return 0; > > - return 0; > + if (dev->pm_domain && dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_resume) > + ret = dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_resume(dev); > + else > + ret = dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume(dev); > + > + return ret; ...and this is pm_runtime_resume()? (though both terribly simplified.) This is starting to show that building with PM_SLEEP but not PM_RUNTIME is going to force open-coding a lot of stuff that the runtime PM framework already provides. So either we need some helper functions so we're not sprinkling manual calls to bus/pm_domain callbacks all over the place, or maybe where we need to go is have a way for platforms that really are "runtime PM centric" to declare that even PM_SLEEP depends on PM_RUNTIME. I'm trying to thing of a good reason to not make PM_SLEEP depend on PM_RUNTIME for platforms like this. Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org> wrote: > Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> writes: > >> Due to the available runtime PM callbacks, we are now able to put our >> device into low power state at system suspend. (...) > I'm trying to thing of a good reason to not make PM_SLEEP depend on > PM_RUNTIME for platforms like this. Isn't the typical Android platform using PM_SLEEP without using PM_RUNTIME? Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 01:49:49PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org> wrote: > > I'm trying to thing of a good reason to not make PM_SLEEP depend on > > PM_RUNTIME for platforms like this. > Isn't the typical Android platform using PM_SLEEP without using > PM_RUNTIME? No, not at all. Android does make aggressive use of sleep but it's also highly desirable to use runtime PM - for example you don't want to have to power up the entire SoC simply because the system is getting a new e-mail pushed to it or location updates, most of the hardware is doing nothing.
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> writes: > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org> wrote: >> Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> writes: >> >>> Due to the available runtime PM callbacks, we are now able to put our >>> device into low power state at system suspend. > (...) >> I'm trying to thing of a good reason to not make PM_SLEEP depend on >> PM_RUNTIME for platforms like this. > > Isn't the typical Android platform using PM_SLEEP without using > PM_RUNTIME? No, most Android platforms that I'm aware of use both extensively. Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 4 February 2014 20:22, Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org> wrote: > Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> writes: > >> Due to the available runtime PM callbacks, we are now able to put our >> device into low power state at system suspend. >> >> Earlier we could not accomplish this without trusting a power domain >> for the device to take care of it. Now we are able to cope with >> scenarios both with and without a power domain. >> >> Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> >> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> >> --- >> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- >> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c >> index c88da1c..074e0cb 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c >> @@ -1723,33 +1723,38 @@ static int mmci_remove(struct amba_device *dev) >> return 0; >> } >> >> -#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND >> -static int mmci_suspend(struct device *dev) >> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP >> +static int mmci_suspend_late(struct device *dev) >> { >> - struct amba_device *adev = to_amba_device(dev); >> - struct mmc_host *mmc = amba_get_drvdata(adev); >> + int ret = 0; >> >> - if (mmc) { >> - struct mmci_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc); >> - pm_runtime_get_sync(dev); >> - writel(0, host->base + MMCIMASK0); >> - } >> + if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev)) >> + return 0; >> >> - return 0; >> + if (dev->pm_domain && dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_suspend) >> + ret = dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_suspend(dev); >> + else >> + ret = dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend(dev); >> + >> + if (!ret) >> + pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev); > > Isn't this basically open-coding pm_runtime_suspend()... It is similar, but with once big difference. Since the PM core prevents pm_runtime_suspend() from invoking our ->runtime_suspend callback during system suspend (it does so by invoking pm_runtime_get_sync() before starting the suspend sequence), we then need to make the driver handle that by itself. > >> + return ret; >> } >> >> -static int mmci_resume(struct device *dev) >> +static int mmci_resume_early(struct device *dev) >> { >> - struct amba_device *adev = to_amba_device(dev); >> - struct mmc_host *mmc = amba_get_drvdata(adev); >> + int ret = 0; >> >> - if (mmc) { >> - struct mmci_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc); >> - writel(MCI_IRQENABLE, host->base + MMCIMASK0); >> - pm_runtime_put(dev); >> - } >> + if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev)) >> + return 0; >> >> - return 0; >> + if (dev->pm_domain && dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_resume) >> + ret = dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_resume(dev); >> + else >> + ret = dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume(dev); >> + >> + return ret; > > ...and this is pm_runtime_resume()? (though both terribly simplified.) Correct, but again with a big difference. See comment above. > > This is starting to show that building with PM_SLEEP but not PM_RUNTIME > is going to force open-coding a lot of stuff that the runtime PM > framework already provides. So either we need some helper functions so > we're not sprinkling manual calls to bus/pm_domain callbacks all over I have send a patch a while ago for the PM core, that tried to implement something similar like this, I wasn't accepted. I will follow up on that asap. Still, do you think we could go ahead with this patch? If/when we can get an acceptance for a PM runtime helper function in the PM core, we can easily convert to use it later on. > the place, or maybe where we need to go is have a way for platforms that > really are "runtime PM centric" to declare that even PM_SLEEP depends on > PM_RUNTIME. > > I'm trying to thing of a good reason to not make PM_SLEEP depend on > PM_RUNTIME for platforms like this. This wont help. The PM core will still prevent the runtime_suspend callback from being invoked during system suspend. Kind regards Ulf Hansson > > Kevin > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> writes: > On 4 February 2014 20:22, Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org> wrote: >> Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> writes: >> >>> Due to the available runtime PM callbacks, we are now able to put our >>> device into low power state at system suspend. >>> >>> Earlier we could not accomplish this without trusting a power domain >>> for the device to take care of it. Now we are able to cope with >>> scenarios both with and without a power domain. >>> >>> Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> >>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- >>> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c >>> index c88da1c..074e0cb 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c >>> @@ -1723,33 +1723,38 @@ static int mmci_remove(struct amba_device *dev) >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> -#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND >>> -static int mmci_suspend(struct device *dev) >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP >>> +static int mmci_suspend_late(struct device *dev) >>> { >>> - struct amba_device *adev = to_amba_device(dev); >>> - struct mmc_host *mmc = amba_get_drvdata(adev); >>> + int ret = 0; >>> >>> - if (mmc) { >>> - struct mmci_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc); >>> - pm_runtime_get_sync(dev); >>> - writel(0, host->base + MMCIMASK0); >>> - } >>> + if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev)) >>> + return 0; >>> >>> - return 0; >>> + if (dev->pm_domain && dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_suspend) >>> + ret = dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_suspend(dev); >>> + else >>> + ret = dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend(dev); >>> + >>> + if (!ret) >>> + pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev); >> >> Isn't this basically open-coding pm_runtime_suspend()... > > It is similar, but with once big difference. > > Since the PM core prevents pm_runtime_suspend() from invoking our > ->runtime_suspend callback during system suspend (it does so by > invoking pm_runtime_get_sync() before starting the suspend sequence), > we then need to make the driver handle that by itself. Yeah, I still think we need to allow a bus/pm_domain to override that behavior. Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c index c88da1c..074e0cb 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c @@ -1723,33 +1723,38 @@ static int mmci_remove(struct amba_device *dev) return 0; } -#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND -static int mmci_suspend(struct device *dev) +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP +static int mmci_suspend_late(struct device *dev) { - struct amba_device *adev = to_amba_device(dev); - struct mmc_host *mmc = amba_get_drvdata(adev); + int ret = 0; - if (mmc) { - struct mmci_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc); - pm_runtime_get_sync(dev); - writel(0, host->base + MMCIMASK0); - } + if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev)) + return 0; - return 0; + if (dev->pm_domain && dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_suspend) + ret = dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_suspend(dev); + else + ret = dev->bus->pm->runtime_suspend(dev); + + if (!ret) + pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev); + + return ret; } -static int mmci_resume(struct device *dev) +static int mmci_resume_early(struct device *dev) { - struct amba_device *adev = to_amba_device(dev); - struct mmc_host *mmc = amba_get_drvdata(adev); + int ret = 0; - if (mmc) { - struct mmci_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc); - writel(MCI_IRQENABLE, host->base + MMCIMASK0); - pm_runtime_put(dev); - } + if (pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev)) + return 0; - return 0; + if (dev->pm_domain && dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_resume) + ret = dev->pm_domain->ops.runtime_resume(dev); + else + ret = dev->bus->pm->runtime_resume(dev); + + return ret; } #endif @@ -1820,7 +1825,7 @@ static int mmci_runtime_resume(struct device *dev) #endif static const struct dev_pm_ops mmci_dev_pm_ops = { - SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(mmci_suspend, mmci_resume) + SET_LATE_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(mmci_suspend_late, mmci_resume_early) SET_PM_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(mmci_runtime_suspend, mmci_runtime_resume, NULL) };
Due to the available runtime PM callbacks, we are now able to put our device into low power state at system suspend. Earlier we could not accomplish this without trusting a power domain for the device to take care of it. Now we are able to cope with scenarios both with and without a power domain. Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> --- drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)