[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161005163734.GD18636@obsidianresearch.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 10:37:34 -0600
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@...el.com>,
"tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: don't destroy chip device prematurely
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 06:15:26PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> The important thing is to notice that runtime PM requires the device
> to be "alive" and in the device hierarchy. It's a constraint...
There are two devices.
The chip->dev and the chip->dev.parent (aka the acpi_device)
Runtime PM is *only* attached to the chip->dev.parent - it does not
interact in any significant way with the chip->dev.
device_del is on the chip->dev. The acpi_device remains intact, and
fully functional.
This is why the whole patch is so confusing to me.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists