[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150417153353.GA24513@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 17:33:53 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PM / sleep: Let devices force direct_complete
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 05:24:49PM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> Introduce a new per-device flag power.force_direct_complete that will
> instruct the PM core to ignore the runtime PM status of its descendants
> when deciding whether to let this device remain in runtime suspend when
> the system goes into a sleep power state.
>
> This is needed because otherwise it would be needed to get dozens of
> drivers to implement the prepare() callback and be runtime PM active
> even if they don't have a 1-to-1 relationship with a piece of HW.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
> ---
> drivers/base/power/main.c | 13 +++++++++----
> include/linux/pm.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/main.c b/drivers/base/power/main.c
> index 3d874ec..728c2dc 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/main.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/main.c
> @@ -1438,7 +1438,9 @@ static int __device_suspend(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state, bool async)
> if (parent) {
> spin_lock_irq(&parent->power.lock);
>
> - dev->parent->power.direct_complete = false;
> + if (!dev->parent->power.force_direct_complete)
> + dev->parent->power.direct_complete = false;
> +
> if (dev->power.wakeup_path
> && !dev->parent->power.ignore_children)
> dev->parent->power.wakeup_path = true;
> @@ -1605,9 +1607,12 @@ static int device_prepare(struct device *dev, pm_message_t state)
> * will do the same thing with all of its descendants". This only
> * applies to suspend transitions, however.
> */
> - spin_lock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
> - dev->power.direct_complete = ret > 0 && state.event == PM_EVENT_SUSPEND;
> - spin_unlock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
> + if (state.event == PM_EVENT_SUSPEND) {
> + spin_lock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
> + dev->power.direct_complete = ret > 0 ||
> + dev->power.force_direct_complete;
> + spin_unlock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
> + }
> return 0;
> }
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/pm.h b/include/linux/pm.h
> index 2d29c64..2e41cfd 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pm.h
> @@ -553,6 +553,7 @@ struct dev_pm_info {
> bool ignore_children:1;
> bool early_init:1; /* Owned by the PM core */
> bool direct_complete:1; /* Owned by the PM core */
> + bool force_direct_complete:1;
Where have you documented this? I foresee this just getting messier and
messier...
--
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