Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] remoteproc: core: Prevent sleep when rproc crashes | From | Siddharth Gupta <> | Date | Tue, 7 Apr 2020 11:00:00 -0700 |
| |
Hey Mathieu, I will be sending a revised patchset soon. Will try to address your comments there.
Thanks, Siddharth
On 2/24/2020 10:53 AM, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 06:11:53PM -0800, Siddharth Gupta wrote: >> Remoteproc recovery should be fast and any delay will have an impact on the >> user-experience. Use power management APIs (pm_stay_awake and pm_relax) to >> ensure that the system does not go to sleep. > When you say "ensure the system does not go to sleep", you're referring to the > system going idle from the CPUidle subsystem? > >> Signed-off-by: Siddharth Gupta <sidgup@codeaurora.org> >> --- >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 4 ++++ >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> index 5ab65a4..52e318c 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c >> @@ -1712,6 +1712,8 @@ static void rproc_crash_handler_work(struct work_struct *work) >> >> if (!rproc->recovery_disabled) >> rproc_trigger_recovery(rproc); >> + >> + pm_relax(&rproc->dev); >> } >> >> /** >> @@ -2242,6 +2244,8 @@ void rproc_report_crash(struct rproc *rproc, enum rproc_crash_type type) >> return; >> } >> >> + pm_stay_awake(&rproc->dev); >> + > I fail to understand how this can be useful since there is no HW associted to > rproc->dev... Is it possible for you to elaborate more on the problem you're > trying to fix? > > Thanks, > Mathieu > >> dev_err(&rproc->dev, "crash detected in %s: type %s\n", >> rproc->name, rproc_crash_to_string(type)); >> >> -- >> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, >> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
| |