[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130913103152.GE29403@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 11:31:52 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>, Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@...sung.com>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] i2c: prepare runtime PM support for I2C client
devices
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 01:16:11PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 10:59:50AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Accessing the bus isn't an issue for I2C outside of ACPI, the power
> > management of the device is totally disassociated from the bus and the
> > controller is responsible for ensuring it is available during transfers.
> Yes, but since we want to support ACPI as well, we must make sure that the
> adapter (and the associated controller) is available when client ->probe()
> is called.
Right, but this probably needs to be highlighted more since it's a very
surprising thing for I2C and is causing confusion.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists