LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
To: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>
Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linaro.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: I2C PM overhaul needed? (Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: sprd: Prevent i2c accesses after suspend is called)
Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 18:32:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180508163221.2slrtg3cidvpj7g2@ninjato> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bef80500-4727-d324-f0c8-4fc6016f43ed@ti.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4110 bytes --]

Grygorii,

thanks a lot for your input. Much appreciated!

> That would be great, but note:
> 1) only i2c_transfer() operations are locked, so if driver is doing 
> i2c_transfer(1)
> i2c_transfer(2) <- suspend in the middle
> <- suspend in between
> i2c_transfer(3)
> It will not help.

Will it not improve the situation by ensuring that at least the transfer
with its (potenitally) multiple messages got completed? That we are at
least in a bus-free state (assuming single-master here) before
suspending?

> Everything depends on timings :( - in my practice 10000 suspend iteration tests
> where required to run many times to catch 3 buggy I2C client drivers.

Matches my experiences that creating a reliable test case for that is
not that easy as I thought. Or I am missing something obvious.

> 2) It's normal to abort suspend if system is busy, so if I2C core will be able
> to catch active I2C operation - it should abort, but again I do not see how it
>  can be detected 100% with current I2C core design or without reworking huge number of drivers.

I agree. After second thought, waiting for i2c_transfer to finish maybe
won't be enough, I am afraid. We don't know if STOP has been put on the
wires yet. My best bet now is that we implement such a
'is-transfer-ongoing'-check in the suspend function of the master
driver? That check should be optional, but recommended.

> 3) So, only one thing I2C core potentially can do - catch invalid access and
> report it. "wait for transfer to finish" wouldn't work as for me.

And we do this in suspend_noirq function of the i2c core.

> > I at least know of some Renesas boards which needed the I2C connected
> > PMIC to do a system reset (not sure about suspend, need to recheck
> > that). That still today causes problems because interrupts are disabled
> > then.
> 
> this was triggered few times already (sry, don't have links), as of now,
>  and as I know, the only ways to W/A this is:
> - to create barametal platform driver (some time in ASM)
> - or delegate final suspend operation to another system controller (co-processor),
>   as example TI am335x SoCs,
> - or implement I2C driver in hw - TI AVS/SmartReflex. 

Yes. Please note that this is only needed for reset, not suspend. So, it
is a bit easier. Still, it might make more sense to use a platform based
solution. I'll think about that.

> Sry, but 99% percent of I2C client drivers *should not* access I2C bus after
> .suspend_noirq() stage it's BUG-BUG!! Any W/A will just hide real problems.

I do believe you, still is there documentation about such things? I like
to understand more but didn't dig up something up to now. E.g. I grepped
for "noirq" in Documentation/power.

> "master_xfer_irqless" might be a not bad idea, but, in my opinion, it 
> should be used explicitly by platform code only, and each usage should
> be proved to exist. 

Yes, we can think about it once it is really needed.

> Some additional info:

Thanks a lot for that!

> I'm attaching some very old patch (don't ask me why it was not sent :()
> I did for Android system - which likes suspend very much. Some
> part of below diff are obsolete now (like omap_i2c_suspend()),
> but .noirq() callback are still valid and can show over all idea.
> Really helped to catch min 3 buggy client drivers with timers, delayed
> or periodic works.

Ok, so what do you think about my plan to:

1) encourage drivers to check if there is still an ongoing transfer in
their .suspend function (or the core can do that, too, if we agree that
checking for a taken adapter lock is sufficient)

-> to ensure transfers don't get interrupted in the middle

2) use a .suspend_noirq callback in i2c_bus_type.pm to reject and WARN
about transfers still going on in that phase

-> this ensures that buggy drivers are caught

3) write some documentation about our findings / assumptions /
recommendations to a file in Documentation/i2c/

-> this ensures we won't forget why we did things like they are ;)

?

Kind regards,

   Wolfram


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-08 16:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-04-09  6:40 [PATCH 1/2] i2c: sprd: Prevent i2c accesses after suspend is called Baolin Wang
2018-04-09  6:40 ` [PATCH 2/2] i2c: sprd: Fix the i2c count issue Baolin Wang
2018-04-27 12:14   ` Wolfram Sang
2018-04-09 20:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] i2c: sprd: Prevent i2c accesses after suspend is called Grygorii Strashko
2018-04-10  8:08   ` Baolin Wang
2018-04-27 12:14 ` Wolfram Sang
2018-05-02  3:27   ` Baolin Wang
2018-05-02  5:23     ` Wolfram Sang
2018-05-02  5:48       ` Baolin Wang
2018-05-03 16:26         ` Grygorii Strashko
2018-05-04 12:24           ` I2C PM overhaul needed? (Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: sprd: Prevent i2c accesses after suspend is called) Wolfram Sang
2018-05-05  1:54             ` Mark Brown
2018-05-05  8:32               ` Wolfram Sang
2018-05-09  8:18                 ` Mark Brown
2018-05-07 17:48             ` Grygorii Strashko
2018-05-08 16:32               ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2018-05-08 18:31                 ` Peter Rosin
2018-05-11 15:14                 ` Grygorii Strashko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180508163221.2slrtg3cidvpj7g2@ninjato \
    --to=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linaro.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=grygorii.strashko@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: I2C PM overhaul needed? (Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: sprd: Prevent i2c accesses after suspend is called)' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).