Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Sender: cang=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date:   Mon, 16 Nov 2020 09:42:13 +0800
From:   Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc:     asutoshd@codeaurora.org, nguyenb@codeaurora.org,
        hongwus@codeaurora.org, ziqichen@codeaurora.org,
        rnayak@codeaurora.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@android.com, saravanak@google.com, salyzyn@google.com,
        Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v1 1/1] scsi: pm: Leave runtime resume along if block
 layer PM is enabled
In-Reply-To: <97dea590-5f2e-b4e3-ac64-7c346761c523@acm.org>
References: <1605249009-13752-1-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org>
 <1605249009-13752-2-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org>
 <97dea590-5f2e-b4e3-ac64-7c346761c523@acm.org>
Message-ID: <20f447a438aa98afb18be4642c8888b3@codeaurora.org>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.9
Precedence: bulk

Hi Bart,

Resent, typo fixed.

On 2020-11-15 04:57, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 11/12/20 10:30 PM, Can Guo wrote:
>> If block layer runtime PM is enabled for one SCSI device, then there 
>> is
>> no need to forcibly change the SCSI device and its request queue's 
>> runtime
>> PM status to active in scsi_dev_type_resume(), since block layer PM 
>> shall
>> resume the SCSI device on the demand of bios.
> 
> Please change "along" into "alone" in the subject of this patch (if 
> that
> is what you meant).
> 

Aha, sorry, a typo here.

>> +	if (scsi_is_sdev_device(dev)) {
>> +		struct scsi_device *sdev;
>> 
>> +		sdev = to_scsi_device(dev);
> 
> A minor comment: I think that "struct scsi_device *sdev =
> to_scsi_device(dev);" fits on a single line.
> 

Sure.

>> +		 * If block layer runtime PM is enabled for the SCSI device,
>> +		 * let block layer PM handle its runtime PM routines.
> 
> Please change "its runtime PM routines" into "runtime resume" or
> similar. I think that will make the comment more clear.
> 

Yes, thanks.

>> +		if (sdev->request_queue->dev)
>> +			return err;
>> +	}
> 
> The 'dev' member only exists in struct request_queue if CONFIG_PM=y so
> the above won't compile if CONFIG_PM=n. How about adding a function in
> include/linux/blk-pm.h to check whether or not runtime PM has been 
> enabled?
> 

You are right.

> Otherwise this patch looks good to me.
> 

Actually, I am thinking about removing all the pm_runtime_set_active()
codes in both scsi_bus_resume_common() and scsi_dev_type_resume() - we
don't need to forcibly set the runtime PM status to RPM_ACTIVE for 
either
SCSI host/target or SCSI devices.

Whenever we access one SCSI device, either block layer or somewhere in
the path (e.g. throgh sg IOCTL, sg_open() calls 
scsi_autopm_get_device())
should runtime resume the device first, and the runtime PM framework 
makes
sure device's parent (and its parent's parent and so on)gets resumed as 
well.
Thus, the pm_runtime_set_active() seems redundant. What do you think?

Thanks,

Can Guo.

> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.