linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 07/12] ASoC: arizona-jack: Use arizona->dev for runtime-pm

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 22 Jan 2021 11:38:34 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@...el.com>,
        Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jie Yang <yang.jie@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, patches@...nsource.cirrus.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
        ALSA Development Mailing List <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/12] ASoC: arizona-jack: Use arizona->dev for runtime-pm

On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 2:03 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 1/18/21 1:02 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 6:06 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:

...

> > Can you elaborate switchings from get() to get_sync() in few places
>
> Sorry, those 2 changes really should have been in a separate commit.
> I've put the 2 get -> get_sync() changed in their own commit now
> with the following commit-msg:
>
> """
> extcon: arizona: Always use pm_runtime_get_sync() when we need the device to be awake
>
> Before this commit the extcon-arizona code was mixing pm_runtime_get()
> and pm_runtime_get_sync() in different places. In all cases where
> either function is called we make use of the device immediately

called and we

> afterwards. This means that we should always use pm_runtime_get_sync().
> """
>
> > along with moving disable()?
> The enable / disable calls are not moved, they are removed.
>
> Here is a new commit msg which hopefully explains this better
> which I plan to use for v3:
>
> """
> Drivers for MFD child-devices such as the arizona codec drivers
> and the arizona-extcon driver can choose to either make
> runtime_pm_get/_put calls on their own child-device, which will
> then be propagated to their parent; or they can make them directly
> on their MFD parent-device.
>
> The arizona-extcon code was using runtime_pm_get/_put calls on
> its own child-device where as the codec drivers are using
> runtime_pm_get/_put calls on their parent.
>
> The arizona-extcon MFD cell/child-device has been removed and this
> commit is part of refactoring the arizona-extcon code into a library
> to be used directly from the codec drivers.
>
> Specifically this commit moves the code over to make
> runtime_pm_get/_put calls on the parent device (on arizona->dev)
> bringing the code inline with how the codec drivers do this.
>
> Note this also removes the pm_runtime_enable/_disable calls
> as pm_runtime support has already been enabled on the parent-device
> by the arizona MFD driver.
> """

Makes sense to me, thanks!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko