linux/Documentation/power/runtime_pm.rst

959 lines
46 KiB

PM: Make system-wide PM and runtime PM treat subsystems consistently The code handling system-wide power transitions (eg. suspend-to-RAM) can in theory execute callbacks provided by the device's bus type, device type and class in each phase of the power transition. In turn, the runtime PM core code only calls one of those callbacks at a time, preferring bus type callbacks to device type or class callbacks and device type callbacks to class callbacks. It seems reasonable to make them both behave in the same way in that respect. Moreover, even though a device may belong to two subsystems (eg. bus type and device class) simultaneously, in practice power management callbacks for system-wide power transitions are always provided by only one of them (ie. if the bus type callbacks are defined, the device class ones are not and vice versa). Thus it is possible to modify the code handling system-wide power transitions so that it follows the core runtime PM code (ie. treats the subsystem callbacks as mutually exclusive). On the other hand, the core runtime PM code will choose to execute, for example, a runtime suspend callback provided by the device type even if the bus type's struct dev_pm_ops object exists, but the runtime_suspend pointer in it happens to be NULL. This is confusing, because it may lead to the execution of callbacks from different subsystems during different operations (eg. the bus type suspend callback may be executed during runtime suspend of the device, while the device type callback will be executed during system suspend). Make all of the power management code treat subsystem callbacks in a consistent way, such that: (1) If the device's type is defined (eg. dev->type is not NULL) and its pm pointer is not NULL, the callbacks from dev->type->pm will be used. (2) If dev->type is NULL or dev->type->pm is NULL, but the device's class is defined (eg. dev->class is not NULL) and its pm pointer is not NULL, the callbacks from dev->class->pm will be used. (3) If dev->type is NULL or dev->type->pm is NULL and dev->class is NULL or dev->class->pm is NULL, the callbacks from dev->bus->pm will be used provided that both dev->bus and dev->bus->pm are not NULL. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> Reasoning-sounds-sane-to: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2011-02-18 23:20:21 +01:00
PM: runtime: Capture device status before disabling runtime PM In some cases (for example, during system-wide suspend and resume of devices) it is useful to know whether or not runtime PM has ever been enabled for a given device and, if so, what the runtime PM status of it had been right before runtime PM was disabled for it last time. For this reason, introduce a new struct dev_pm_info field called last_status that will be used for capturing the runtime PM status of the device when its power.disable_depth counter changes from 0 to 1. The new field will be set to RPM_INVALID to start with and whenever power.disable_depth changes from 1 to 0, so it will be valid only when runtime PM of the device is currently disabled, but it has been enabled at least once. Immediately use power.last_status in rpm_resume() to make it handle the case when PM runtime is disabled for the device, but its runtime PM status is RPM_ACTIVE more consistently. Namely, make it return 1 if power.last_status is also equal to RPM_ACTIVE in that case (the idea being that if the status was RPM_ACTIVE last time when power.disable_depth was changing from 0 to 1 and it is still RPM_ACTIVE, it can be assumed to reflect what happened to the device last time when it was using runtime PM) and -EACCES otherwise. Update the documentation to provide a description of last_status and change the description of pm_runtime_resume() in it to reflect the new behavior of rpm_active(). While at it, rearrange the code in pm_runtime_enable() to be more straightforward and replace the WARN() macro in it with a pr_warn() invocation which is less disruptive. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20211026222626.39222-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org/t/#u Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2021-12-07 19:54:32 +01:00
PM: runtime: Capture device status before disabling runtime PM In some cases (for example, during system-wide suspend and resume of devices) it is useful to know whether or not runtime PM has ever been enabled for a given device and, if so, what the runtime PM status of it had been right before runtime PM was disabled for it last time. For this reason, introduce a new struct dev_pm_info field called last_status that will be used for capturing the runtime PM status of the device when its power.disable_depth counter changes from 0 to 1. The new field will be set to RPM_INVALID to start with and whenever power.disable_depth changes from 1 to 0, so it will be valid only when runtime PM of the device is currently disabled, but it has been enabled at least once. Immediately use power.last_status in rpm_resume() to make it handle the case when PM runtime is disabled for the device, but its runtime PM status is RPM_ACTIVE more consistently. Namely, make it return 1 if power.last_status is also equal to RPM_ACTIVE in that case (the idea being that if the status was RPM_ACTIVE last time when power.disable_depth was changing from 0 to 1 and it is still RPM_ACTIVE, it can be assumed to reflect what happened to the device last time when it was using runtime PM) and -EACCES otherwise. Update the documentation to provide a description of last_status and change the description of pm_runtime_resume() in it to reflect the new behavior of rpm_active(). While at it, rearrange the code in pm_runtime_enable() to be more straightforward and replace the WARN() macro in it with a pr_warn() invocation which is less disruptive. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20211026222626.39222-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org/t/#u Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
2021-12-07 19:54:32 +01:00
PM: Limit race conditions between runtime PM and system sleep (v2) One of the roles of the PM core is to prevent different PM callbacks executed for the same device object from racing with each other. Unfortunately, after commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 (PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend) runtime PM callbacks may be executed concurrently with system suspend/resume callbacks for the same device. The main reason for commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 was that some subsystems and device drivers wanted to use runtime PM helpers, pm_runtime_suspend() and pm_runtime_put_sync() in particular, for carrying out the suspend of devices in their .suspend() callbacks. However, as it's been determined recently, there are multiple reasons not to do so, inlcuding: * The caller really doesn't control the runtime PM usage counters, because user space can access them through sysfs and effectively block runtime PM. That means using pm_runtime_suspend() or pm_runtime_get_sync() to suspend devices during system suspend may or may not work. * If a driver calls pm_runtime_suspend() from its .suspend() callback, it causes the subsystem's .runtime_suspend() callback to be executed, which leads to the call sequence: subsys->suspend(dev) driver->suspend(dev) pm_runtime_suspend(dev) subsys->runtime_suspend(dev) recursive from the subsystem's point of view. For some subsystems that may actually work (e.g. the platform bus type), but for some it will fail in a rather spectacular fashion (e.g. PCI). In each case it means a layering violation. * Both the subsystem and the driver can provide .suspend_noirq() callbacks for system suspend that can do whatever the .runtime_suspend() callbacks do just fine, so it really isn't necessary to call pm_runtime_suspend() during system suspend. * The runtime PM's handling of wakeup devices is usually different from the system suspend's one, so .runtime_suspend() may simply be inappropriate for system suspend. * System suspend is supposed to work even if CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME is unset. * The runtime PM workqueue is frozen before system suspend, so if whatever the driver is going to do during system suspend depends on it, that simply won't work. Still, there is a good reason to allow pm_runtime_resume() to succeed during system suspend and resume (for instance, some subsystems and device drivers may legitimately use it to ensure that their devices are in full-power states before suspending them). Moreover, there is no reason to prevent runtime PM callbacks from being executed in parallel with the system suspend/resume .prepare() and .complete() callbacks and the code removed by commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 went too far in this respect. On the other hand, runtime PM callbacks, including .runtime_resume(), must not be executed during system suspend's "late" stage of suspending devices and during system resume's "early" device resume stage. Taking all of the above into consideration, make the PM core acquire a runtime PM reference to every device and resume it if there's a runtime PM resume request pending right before executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callback for it. Make the PM core drop references to all devices right after executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Additionally, make the PM core disable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system suspend, after executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callbacks for them, and enable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system resume, right before executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
2011-07-06 10:51:58 +02:00
PM: Limit race conditions between runtime PM and system sleep (v2) One of the roles of the PM core is to prevent different PM callbacks executed for the same device object from racing with each other. Unfortunately, after commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 (PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend) runtime PM callbacks may be executed concurrently with system suspend/resume callbacks for the same device. The main reason for commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 was that some subsystems and device drivers wanted to use runtime PM helpers, pm_runtime_suspend() and pm_runtime_put_sync() in particular, for carrying out the suspend of devices in their .suspend() callbacks. However, as it's been determined recently, there are multiple reasons not to do so, inlcuding: * The caller really doesn't control the runtime PM usage counters, because user space can access them through sysfs and effectively block runtime PM. That means using pm_runtime_suspend() or pm_runtime_get_sync() to suspend devices during system suspend may or may not work. * If a driver calls pm_runtime_suspend() from its .suspend() callback, it causes the subsystem's .runtime_suspend() callback to be executed, which leads to the call sequence: subsys->suspend(dev) driver->suspend(dev) pm_runtime_suspend(dev) subsys->runtime_suspend(dev) recursive from the subsystem's point of view. For some subsystems that may actually work (e.g. the platform bus type), but for some it will fail in a rather spectacular fashion (e.g. PCI). In each case it means a layering violation. * Both the subsystem and the driver can provide .suspend_noirq() callbacks for system suspend that can do whatever the .runtime_suspend() callbacks do just fine, so it really isn't necessary to call pm_runtime_suspend() during system suspend. * The runtime PM's handling of wakeup devices is usually different from the system suspend's one, so .runtime_suspend() may simply be inappropriate for system suspend. * System suspend is supposed to work even if CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME is unset. * The runtime PM workqueue is frozen before system suspend, so if whatever the driver is going to do during system suspend depends on it, that simply won't work. Still, there is a good reason to allow pm_runtime_resume() to succeed during system suspend and resume (for instance, some subsystems and device drivers may legitimately use it to ensure that their devices are in full-power states before suspending them). Moreover, there is no reason to prevent runtime PM callbacks from being executed in parallel with the system suspend/resume .prepare() and .complete() callbacks and the code removed by commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 went too far in this respect. On the other hand, runtime PM callbacks, including .runtime_resume(), must not be executed during system suspend's "late" stage of suspending devices and during system resume's "early" device resume stage. Taking all of the above into consideration, make the PM core acquire a runtime PM reference to every device and resume it if there's a runtime PM resume request pending right before executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callback for it. Make the PM core drop references to all devices right after executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Additionally, make the PM core disable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system suspend, after executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callbacks for them, and enable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system resume, right before executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
2011-07-06 10:51:58 +02:00
PM: Limit race conditions between runtime PM and system sleep (v2) One of the roles of the PM core is to prevent different PM callbacks executed for the same device object from racing with each other. Unfortunately, after commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 (PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend) runtime PM callbacks may be executed concurrently with system suspend/resume callbacks for the same device. The main reason for commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 was that some subsystems and device drivers wanted to use runtime PM helpers, pm_runtime_suspend() and pm_runtime_put_sync() in particular, for carrying out the suspend of devices in their .suspend() callbacks. However, as it's been determined recently, there are multiple reasons not to do so, inlcuding: * The caller really doesn't control the runtime PM usage counters, because user space can access them through sysfs and effectively block runtime PM. That means using pm_runtime_suspend() or pm_runtime_get_sync() to suspend devices during system suspend may or may not work. * If a driver calls pm_runtime_suspend() from its .suspend() callback, it causes the subsystem's .runtime_suspend() callback to be executed, which leads to the call sequence: subsys->suspend(dev) driver->suspend(dev) pm_runtime_suspend(dev) subsys->runtime_suspend(dev) recursive from the subsystem's point of view. For some subsystems that may actually work (e.g. the platform bus type), but for some it will fail in a rather spectacular fashion (e.g. PCI). In each case it means a layering violation. * Both the subsystem and the driver can provide .suspend_noirq() callbacks for system suspend that can do whatever the .runtime_suspend() callbacks do just fine, so it really isn't necessary to call pm_runtime_suspend() during system suspend. * The runtime PM's handling of wakeup devices is usually different from the system suspend's one, so .runtime_suspend() may simply be inappropriate for system suspend. * System suspend is supposed to work even if CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME is unset. * The runtime PM workqueue is frozen before system suspend, so if whatever the driver is going to do during system suspend depends on it, that simply won't work. Still, there is a good reason to allow pm_runtime_resume() to succeed during system suspend and resume (for instance, some subsystems and device drivers may legitimately use it to ensure that their devices are in full-power states before suspending them). Moreover, there is no reason to prevent runtime PM callbacks from being executed in parallel with the system suspend/resume .prepare() and .complete() callbacks and the code removed by commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 went too far in this respect. On the other hand, runtime PM callbacks, including .runtime_resume(), must not be executed during system suspend's "late" stage of suspending devices and during system resume's "early" device resume stage. Taking all of the above into consideration, make the PM core acquire a runtime PM reference to every device and resume it if there's a runtime PM resume request pending right before executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callback for it. Make the PM core drop references to all devices right after executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Additionally, make the PM core disable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system suspend, after executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callbacks for them, and enable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system resume, right before executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
2011-07-06 10:51:58 +02:00
PM: sleep: Do not flag runtime PM workqueue as freezable Till now, the runtime PM workqueue has been flagged as freezable, so it does not process work items during system-wide PM transitions like system suspend and resume. The original reason to do that was to reduce the likelihood of runtime PM getting in the way of system-wide PM processing, but now it is mostly an optimization because (1) runtime suspend of devices is prevented by bumping up their runtime PM usage counters in device_prepare() and (2) device drivers are expected to disable runtime PM for the devices handled by them before they embark on system-wide PM activities that may change the state of the hardware or otherwise interfere with runtime PM. However, it prevents asynchronous runtime resume of devices from working during system-wide PM transitions, which is confusing because synchronous runtime resume is not prevented at the same time, and it also sometimes turns out to be problematic. For example, it has been reported that blk_queue_enter() may deadlock during a system suspend transition because of the pm_request_resume() usage in it [1]. It may also deadlock during a system resume transition in a similar way. That happens because the asynchronous runtime resume of the given device is not processed due to the freezing of the runtime PM workqueue. While it may be better to address this particular issue in the block layer, the very presence of it means that similar problems may be expected to occur elsewhere. For this reason, remove the WQ_FREEZABLE flag from the runtime PM workqueue and make device_suspend_late() use the generic variant of pm_runtime_disable() that will carry out runtime PM of the device synchronously if there is pending resume work for it. Also update the comment before the pm_runtime_disable() call in device_suspend_late(), to document the fact that the runtime PM should not be expected to work for the device until the end of device_resume_early(), and update the related documentation. This change may, even though it is not expected to, uncover some latent issues related to queuing up asynchronous runtime resume work items during system suspend or hibernation. However, they should be limited to the interference between runtime resume and system-wide PM callbacks in the cases when device drivers start to handle system-wide PM before disabling runtime PM as described above. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20251126101636.205505-2-yang.yang@vivo.com/ Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/12794222.O9o76ZdvQC@rafael.j.wysocki
2025-12-05 16:24:05 +01:00
PM: Limit race conditions between runtime PM and system sleep (v2) One of the roles of the PM core is to prevent different PM callbacks executed for the same device object from racing with each other. Unfortunately, after commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 (PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend) runtime PM callbacks may be executed concurrently with system suspend/resume callbacks for the same device. The main reason for commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 was that some subsystems and device drivers wanted to use runtime PM helpers, pm_runtime_suspend() and pm_runtime_put_sync() in particular, for carrying out the suspend of devices in their .suspend() callbacks. However, as it's been determined recently, there are multiple reasons not to do so, inlcuding: * The caller really doesn't control the runtime PM usage counters, because user space can access them through sysfs and effectively block runtime PM. That means using pm_runtime_suspend() or pm_runtime_get_sync() to suspend devices during system suspend may or may not work. * If a driver calls pm_runtime_suspend() from its .suspend() callback, it causes the subsystem's .runtime_suspend() callback to be executed, which leads to the call sequence: subsys->suspend(dev) driver->suspend(dev) pm_runtime_suspend(dev) subsys->runtime_suspend(dev) recursive from the subsystem's point of view. For some subsystems that may actually work (e.g. the platform bus type), but for some it will fail in a rather spectacular fashion (e.g. PCI). In each case it means a layering violation. * Both the subsystem and the driver can provide .suspend_noirq() callbacks for system suspend that can do whatever the .runtime_suspend() callbacks do just fine, so it really isn't necessary to call pm_runtime_suspend() during system suspend. * The runtime PM's handling of wakeup devices is usually different from the system suspend's one, so .runtime_suspend() may simply be inappropriate for system suspend. * System suspend is supposed to work even if CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME is unset. * The runtime PM workqueue is frozen before system suspend, so if whatever the driver is going to do during system suspend depends on it, that simply won't work. Still, there is a good reason to allow pm_runtime_resume() to succeed during system suspend and resume (for instance, some subsystems and device drivers may legitimately use it to ensure that their devices are in full-power states before suspending them). Moreover, there is no reason to prevent runtime PM callbacks from being executed in parallel with the system suspend/resume .prepare() and .complete() callbacks and the code removed by commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 went too far in this respect. On the other hand, runtime PM callbacks, including .runtime_resume(), must not be executed during system suspend's "late" stage of suspending devices and during system resume's "early" device resume stage. Taking all of the above into consideration, make the PM core acquire a runtime PM reference to every device and resume it if there's a runtime PM resume request pending right before executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callback for it. Make the PM core drop references to all devices right after executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Additionally, make the PM core disable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system suspend, after executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callbacks for them, and enable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system resume, right before executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
2011-07-06 10:51:58 +02:00
PM: Limit race conditions between runtime PM and system sleep (v2) One of the roles of the PM core is to prevent different PM callbacks executed for the same device object from racing with each other. Unfortunately, after commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 (PM: Allow pm_runtime_suspend() to succeed during system suspend) runtime PM callbacks may be executed concurrently with system suspend/resume callbacks for the same device. The main reason for commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 was that some subsystems and device drivers wanted to use runtime PM helpers, pm_runtime_suspend() and pm_runtime_put_sync() in particular, for carrying out the suspend of devices in their .suspend() callbacks. However, as it's been determined recently, there are multiple reasons not to do so, inlcuding: * The caller really doesn't control the runtime PM usage counters, because user space can access them through sysfs and effectively block runtime PM. That means using pm_runtime_suspend() or pm_runtime_get_sync() to suspend devices during system suspend may or may not work. * If a driver calls pm_runtime_suspend() from its .suspend() callback, it causes the subsystem's .runtime_suspend() callback to be executed, which leads to the call sequence: subsys->suspend(dev) driver->suspend(dev) pm_runtime_suspend(dev) subsys->runtime_suspend(dev) recursive from the subsystem's point of view. For some subsystems that may actually work (e.g. the platform bus type), but for some it will fail in a rather spectacular fashion (e.g. PCI). In each case it means a layering violation. * Both the subsystem and the driver can provide .suspend_noirq() callbacks for system suspend that can do whatever the .runtime_suspend() callbacks do just fine, so it really isn't necessary to call pm_runtime_suspend() during system suspend. * The runtime PM's handling of wakeup devices is usually different from the system suspend's one, so .runtime_suspend() may simply be inappropriate for system suspend. * System suspend is supposed to work even if CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME is unset. * The runtime PM workqueue is frozen before system suspend, so if whatever the driver is going to do during system suspend depends on it, that simply won't work. Still, there is a good reason to allow pm_runtime_resume() to succeed during system suspend and resume (for instance, some subsystems and device drivers may legitimately use it to ensure that their devices are in full-power states before suspending them). Moreover, there is no reason to prevent runtime PM callbacks from being executed in parallel with the system suspend/resume .prepare() and .complete() callbacks and the code removed by commit e8665002477f0278f84f898145b1f141ba26ee26 went too far in this respect. On the other hand, runtime PM callbacks, including .runtime_resume(), must not be executed during system suspend's "late" stage of suspending devices and during system resume's "early" device resume stage. Taking all of the above into consideration, make the PM core acquire a runtime PM reference to every device and resume it if there's a runtime PM resume request pending right before executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callback for it. Make the PM core drop references to all devices right after executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Additionally, make the PM core disable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system suspend, after executing the subsystem-level .suspend() callbacks for them, and enable the runtime PM framework for all devices during system resume, right before executing the subsystem-level .resume() callbacks for them. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
2011-07-06 10:51:58 +02:00