Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: We aren't notified of our own failure w/ NOTIFY_BAD | From | Maulik Shah <> | Date | Thu, 23 Apr 2020 10:18:30 +0530 |
| |
Reviewed-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@codeaurora.org>
Thanks, Maulik
On 4/23/2020 3:25 AM, Douglas Anderson wrote: > When a PM Notifier returns NOTIFY_BAD it doesn't get called with > CPU_PM_ENTER_FAILED. It only get called for CPU_PM_ENTER_FAILED if > someone else (further down the notifier chain) returns NOTIFY_BAD. > > Handle this case by taking our CPU out of the list of ones that have > entered PM. Without this it's possible we could detect that the last > CPU went down (and we would flush) even if some CPU was alive. That's > not good since our flushing routines currently assume they're running > on the last CPU for mutual exclusion. > > Fixes: 985427f997b6 ("soc: qcom: rpmh: Invoke rpmh_flush() for dirty caches") > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > --- > > Changes in v4: > - ("...We aren't notified of our own failure...") split out for v4. > > Changes in v3: None > Changes in v2: None > > drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c > index 3571a99fc839..e540e49fd61c 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh-rsc.c > @@ -823,6 +823,10 @@ static int rpmh_rsc_cpu_pm_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, > ret = NOTIFY_OK; > > exit: > + if (ret == NOTIFY_BAD) > + /* We won't be called w/ CPU_PM_ENTER_FAILED */ > + cpumask_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &drv->cpus_entered_pm); > + > spin_unlock(&drv->pm_lock); > return ret; > }
-- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
| |