Hi,
Well, unfortunately I have only a little experience with writing device
drivers, so please take my comments below with a grain of salt.
Also, I think it's better to discuss this on linux-pm to which some more
experienced people are subscribed.
On Thursday, 11 October 2007 05:13, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have few questions about .suspend()/.resume() driver functions and how best to write them.
>
> I have written a support for suspend/resume for saa7134 v4l driver.
> Now looking at code again and again, I found few problems, and I am seeking your advice how to fix them.
>
> First of all the .suspend() function:
>
> Looking at various drivers (including v4l ones) it seems that in general the function:
>
> 1) tells upper layers that it is suspended
> 2) saves the state of device
> (generally there is nothing to save, since the driver maintains a copy of device state in memory)
>
> 3) disables the device (including DMA)
> 4) does usual pci_save_state+pci_set_power_state(pci_dev, pci_choose_state(pci_dev, state))
> (I am talking about pci devices of course)
>
> But there is one problem that my .suspend() function have together with quite a lot of drivers:
> It can race with IRQ handler. Suppose the handler is called just before .suspend(), and thus .suspend() literally
> pulls the hadware from that handler.
>
> I was told that I should use synchronize_irq(), and it looks exactly like the solution.
Yes, that seems to be the right solution.
> But I was surprised to see that very few drivers use it in their .suspend() routines.
Frankly, I'm not sure why that is so.
> Another issue, even bigger happens during the resume:
> Suppose the IRQ line is shared with some other device and it gets resumed first.
> And my IRQ handler is called because of the other device.
> Now my IRQ handler can't determine whenever the IRQ for the device, since the hardware is still powered off.
>
> Probably I can fix the following issues doing this:
>
> 1) do free_irq() in .suspend(), and request_irq() in .resume
> this solves both problems since free_irq() calls synchronize_irq()
> Few drivers do that this way. I would like to know if this is the right way.
AFAICS, it is not and these drivers should probably be modified not to do so.
The problem, as I see it, is that we don't know what state the device will be
in during the resume (this may be a resume from disk and the device may have
been initialized by the BIOS and we get it actually generating interrupts).
> 2) Disable the card's IRQ register , then call synchronize_irq(), at that
> point I can be sure that no IRQ handler is running and will run then set some
> per device flag say dev->insuspend
>
> let IRQ handler check this flag, and bail out if set, so false interrupts are caught on resume
> Probably not a good idea, since I didn't find such implementation in kernel
I'm not sure of that. Sounds better than freeing the IRQs in .suspend() to me.
Greetings,
Rafael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
