[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <TY1PR06MB0992A6FD8D85E0345EF198D2D8390@TY1PR06MB0992.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 11:54:39 +0000
From: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
CC: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
"USB list" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] PM / runtime: Drop children check from
__pm_runtime_set_status()
Hi again,
> From: Yoshihiro Shimoda, Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 8:04 PM
>
> Hi,
>
<snip>
> However, the following message still exists.
>
> Enabling runtime PM for inactive device (ee080000.usb) with active children
>
> So, I guess ohci-platform.c also has similar issue.
>
> JFYI, the ehci-platform.c doesn't have runtime PM handling.
> So, I think that error message doesn't output from ehci devices.
I have update.
If I added to call pm_runtime_forbid() in ohci-platform.c like xhci-plat.c,
the issue disappeared. I don't understand the pm_runtime_forbid() behavior yet,
but is this acceptable?
Best regards,
Yoshihiro Shimoda
> Best regards,
> Yoshihiro Shimoda
Powered by blists - more mailing lists