[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141101005514.GY27405@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 00:55:14 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/5] amba: Don't unprepare the clocks if device driver
wants IRQ safe runtime PM
On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 01:45:47AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, October 20, 2014 11:04:46 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > @@ -198,8 +217,10 @@ static int amba_probe(struct device *dev)
> > pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> >
> > ret = pcdrv->probe(pcdev, id);
> > - if (ret == 0)
> > + if (ret == 0) {
> > + pcdev->irq_safe = pm_runtime_is_irq_safe(dev);
>
> This looks racy.
>
> Is it guaranteed that runtime PM callbacks won't be run for the device
> after pcdrv->probe() has returned and before setting pcdev->irq_safe?
> If not, inconsistent behavior may ensue.
You are absolutely correct. So that knocks that idea on its head.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
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