[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180517052107.GT13271@vkoul-mobl>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 10:51:07 +0530
From: Vinod <vkoul@...nel.org>
To: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Cc: agross@...eaurora.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom: bam_dma: check if the runtime pm enabled
On 14-05-18, 17:18, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> Disabling pm runtime at probe is not sufficient to get BAM working
> on remotely controller instances. pm_runtime_get_sync() would return
> -EACCES in such cases.
> So check if runtime pm is enabled before returning error from bam functions.
>
> Fixes: 5b4a68952a89 ("dmaengine: qcom: bam_dma: disable runtime pm on remote controlled")
> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
> ---
> drivers/dma/qcom/bam_dma.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/qcom/bam_dma.c b/drivers/dma/qcom/bam_dma.c
> index d29275b97e84..5f4babebc508 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/qcom/bam_dma.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/qcom/bam_dma.c
> @@ -540,7 +540,7 @@ static void bam_free_chan(struct dma_chan *chan)
> int ret;
>
> ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(bdev->dev);
> - if (ret < 0)
> + if (pm_runtime_enabled(bdev->dev) && ret < 0)
would it make sense to first check enabled and do _get_sync()
if (pm_runtime_enabled()) {
ret = pm_runtime_get_sync() {
...
}
}
thus making clear in code that we do calls only when it is enabled. Also you can
add a local macro for this code and use that rather than copy pasting :)
--
~Vinod
Powered by blists - more mailing lists