| Message ID | 20180602023215.176521-1-ravisadineni@chromium.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Mainlined |
| Delegated to: | Rafael Wysocki |
| Headers | show |
On Fri 2018-06-01 19:32:15, Ravi Chandra Sadineni wrote: > Currently we show event_count instead of wakeup_count as part of per > device wakeup_count sysfs attribute. Change it to wakeup_count to make > it more meaningful. > > Signed-off-by: Ravi Chandra Sadineni <ravisadineni@chromium.org> Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 4:32 AM, Ravi Chandra Sadineni <ravisadineni@chromium.org> wrote: > Currently we show event_count instead of wakeup_count as part of per > device wakeup_count sysfs attribute. Change it to wakeup_count to make > it more meaningful. More information, please. In particular, why it is more meaningful. Thanks, Rafael
Hi Rafael, On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 1:05 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 4:32 AM, Ravi Chandra Sadineni > <ravisadineni@chromium.org> wrote: >> Currently we show event_count instead of wakeup_count as part of per >> device wakeup_count sysfs attribute. Change it to wakeup_count to make >> it more meaningful. > > More information, please. > > In particular, why it is more meaningful. Wakeup_count increments only when events_check_enabled is set. This bool is set whenever we write current wakeup count to /sys/power/wakeup_count from the user land. Also events_check_enabled is cleared on every resume. My understanding is that, userland is expected to write to this just before suspend. This way pm_wakeup_event() when called from irqs will increment the wakeup_count only if we are in system wide suspend resume cycle and should give a fair approximation of how many times a device might have caused a wake from S3/S0iX. event_count on the other hand will increment every time pm_wakeup_event() is called irrespective of whether we are in a suspend/resume cycle. For example when I try doing something like this (https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/6/1/890), we see the wakeup_count sysfs attribute for the particular device incrementing every time there is a irq. If it is important to expose event_count via sysfs attribute, should we create another attribute ? Also we do expose each of these counters via debugfs(/sys/kernel/debug/wake_sources). Please correct me if I am wrong or missing something. Also if there is a better way to do this, please let me know. > > Thanks, > Rafael
Hi Rafeal, Soft ping. Is this patch good to be merged ? Thanks, Ravi On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Ravi Chandra Sadineni <ravisadineni@google.com> wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 1:05 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 4:32 AM, Ravi Chandra Sadineni >> <ravisadineni@chromium.org> wrote: >>> Currently we show event_count instead of wakeup_count as part of per >>> device wakeup_count sysfs attribute. Change it to wakeup_count to make >>> it more meaningful. >> >> More information, please. >> >> In particular, why it is more meaningful. > Wakeup_count increments only when events_check_enabled is set. This > bool is set whenever we write current wakeup count to > /sys/power/wakeup_count from the user land. Also events_check_enabled > is cleared on every resume. My understanding is that, userland is > expected to write to this just before suspend. This way > pm_wakeup_event() when called from irqs will increment the > wakeup_count only if we are in system wide suspend resume cycle and > should give a fair approximation of how many times a device might have > caused a wake from S3/S0iX. event_count on the other hand will > increment every time pm_wakeup_event() is called irrespective of > whether we are in a suspend/resume cycle. For example when I try > doing something like this (https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/6/1/890), we see > the wakeup_count sysfs attribute for the particular device > incrementing every time there is a irq. If it is important to expose > event_count via sysfs attribute, should we create another attribute ? > Also we do expose each of these counters via > debugfs(/sys/kernel/debug/wake_sources). > > Please correct me if I am wrong or missing something. Also if there is > a better way to do this, please let me know. >> >> Thanks, >> Rafael
On Thursday, June 7, 2018 6:47:24 PM CEST Ravi Chandra Sadineni wrote: > Hi Rafeal, > > Soft ping. Is this patch good to be merged ? Yes, it is. It's there in my linux-next branch. Thanks, Rafael
diff --git a/drivers/base/power/sysfs.c b/drivers/base/power/sysfs.c index 0f651efc58a1a..d713738ce7967 100644 --- a/drivers/base/power/sysfs.c +++ b/drivers/base/power/sysfs.c @@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ static ssize_t wakeup_count_show(struct device *dev, spin_lock_irq(&dev->power.lock); if (dev->power.wakeup) { - count = dev->power.wakeup->event_count; + count = dev->power.wakeup->wakeup_count; enabled = true; } spin_unlock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
Currently we show event_count instead of wakeup_count as part of per device wakeup_count sysfs attribute. Change it to wakeup_count to make it more meaningful. Signed-off-by: Ravi Chandra Sadineni <ravisadineni@chromium.org> --- drivers/base/power/sysfs.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)