[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5A5F00D1.5010506@rock-chips.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 15:52:49 +0800
From: JeffyChen <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com>
To: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ricky Liang <jcliang@...omium.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
simon xue <xxm@...k-chips.com>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
"list@....net:IOMMU DRIVERS" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/13] iommu/rockchip: Add runtime PM support
Hi Tomasz,
On 01/17/2018 03:38 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>> >>Don't we need to check here (and in _shutdown() too) if we have a
>>> >>domain attached?
>> >
>> >hmmm, right, the startup might been called by resume, so should check
>> >iommu->domain here.
>> >
>> >but the shutdown would be called at the end of detach or suspend, it could
>> >be not attached or attached.
> If startup might be called by resume, without domain attached, what
> prevents shutdown from being called by suspend after that resume,
> still without domain attached? Is it guaranteed that if resume is
> called, someone will attach a domain before suspend is called?
>
no, the shutdown would be called by:
1/ end of detach_dev
so it would be not attached at that time
2/ suspend
so it could be attached, and also could be not attached
anyway, i think the shutdown would work without domain attached(just
disable paging and clear the iommu bases) ;)
> Best regards,
> Tomasz
>
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists