[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFq_k7dRjuf+XW=DDkM1K2EJ_4vAAs0tTrd+WbUxqxP-tw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 15:12:49 +0100
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...pv.it>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Chris Ball <chris@...ntf.net>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/17] i2c: nomadik: Fixup deployment of runtime PM
On 10 February 2014 11:14, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
> On 5 February 2014 15:34, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Since the device is active while a successful probe has been completed,
>>> the reference counting for the clock will be screwed up and never reach
>>> zero.
>>>
>>> The issue is resolved by implementing runtime PM callbacks and let them
>>> handle the resources accordingly, including the clock.
>>>
>>> Cc: Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...pv.it>
>>> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
>>> Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
>>
>> Hm do I read it right as patch 13 breaks runtime PM by leaving
>> the device active after probe() and this patch
>> 14 fixes it again? Maybe these two patches should be squashed
>> then.
In v2 I have now squashed patch 13 into this patch 14.
That means patch13 shall be dropped from this patchset.
Kind regards
Uffe
>
> You are right; but the driver will still be working, you just don't
> get the benefit from inactivating the device at request inactivity -
> as you pointed out.
>
> The reason for why I wanted to do this as separate steps was to make
> it easier for reviewing, otherwise the patch(es) would have been quite
> big and messy. I am for sure open to adopt to your proposal, but just
> wanted to give you some more background, before I go ahead and send a
> v2.
>
> Kind regards
> Ulf Hansson
>
>>
>> Yours,
>> Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists