Subject: Re: Regression in v5.0-rc1 with autosuspend hrtimers

From: Vincent Guittot <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 02:42:18 +0100

Le Tuesday 08 Jan 2019 à 13:37:43 (-0800), Tony Lindgren a écrit :
> * Vincent Guittot <[email-masked]> [190108 16:42]:
> > On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 16:53, Tony Lindgren <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > > Hmm so could it be that we now rely on timers that that may
> > > not be capable of waking up the system from idle states with
> > > hrtimer?
> > 
> > With nohz and hrtimer enabled,  timer relies on hrtimer to generate
> > the tick so you should use the same interrupt.
> 
> OK yeah looks like that part is working just fine.
> 
> Adding some printks and debugging over ssh, looks like
> omap8250_runtime_resume() gets called just fine based on a wakeirq,
> but then omap8250_runtime_suspend() runs immediately instead of
> waiting for the three second timeout.
> 
> Lowering the autosuspend_delay_ms to 2100 ms makes things work again.
> Anything higher than 2200 ms seems to somehow time out immediately
> now :)

This is quite close to the max ns of an int on arm 32bits

Could you try the patch below ?

---
 drivers/base/power/runtime.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
index 7062469..44c5c76 100644
--- a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
+++ b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
@@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ u64 pm_runtime_autosuspend_expiration(struct device *dev)
 
 	last_busy = READ_ONCE(dev->power.last_busy);
 
-	expires = last_busy + autosuspend_delay * NSEC_PER_MSEC;
+	expires = last_busy + (u64)(autosuspend_delay) * NSEC_PER_MSEC;
 	if (expires <= now)
 		expires = 0;	/* Already expired. */
 
-- 
2.7.4

> Regards,
> Tony

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel