[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211126155935.2zagoe6gfkh5pi22@houat>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 16:59:35 +0100
From: Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
To: Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] leds: sun50i-r329: New driver for the R329/D1 LED
controller
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 09:26:15AM -0600, Samuel Holland wrote:
> >>>> + ret = sun50i_r329_ledc_resume(dev);
> >>>> + if (ret)
> >>>> + return ret;
> >>>
> >>> You seem to fill the runtime_pm hooks, but only call them directly and
> >>> never enable runtime_pm on that device, is that intentional?
> >>
> >> Yes. I did not want to delay the initial version by adding runtime PM
> >> (and debugging the refcounts) when the driver already works now.
> >> However, I had runtime/system PM in mind while writing the driver.
> >>
> >> If you think it is too confusing, I could rename the functions to
> >> something like sun50i_r329_ledc_hw_init / sun50i_r329_ledc_hw_exit.
> >
> > It's not really the functions themselves that are confusing but rather
> > that you set them as runtime_pm hooks.
>
> I do not set these functions as runtime PM hooks. SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS only sets
> the system PM hooks, for "suspend to RAM and hibernation." Maybe you are
> thinking of SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS, which I do not use?
Ah, right, it's all good then, sorry for the noise
Maxime
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists