[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0e0c98d9-d6a9-cd02-a67d-53492614e8ae@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 07:02:23 -0500
From: Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@...com>
To: <cgel.zte@...il.com>, <nm@...com>
CC: <ssantosh@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>,
Zeal Robot <zealci@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: ti: pruss: using pm_runtime_resume_and_get instead
of pm_runtime_get_sync
On 4/8/22 03:08, cgel.zte@...il.com wrote:
> From: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>
>
> Using pm_runtime_resume_and_get is more appropriate
> for simplifing code
>
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@...com>
> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <zealci@....com.cn>
> Signed-off-by: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>
> ---
> drivers/soc/ti/pruss.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/ti/pruss.c b/drivers/soc/ti/pruss.c
> index b36779309e49..0e4ba0f89533 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/ti/pruss.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/ti/pruss.c
> @@ -279,10 +279,9 @@ static int pruss_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pruss);
>
> pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> - ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
> + ret = pm_runtime_resume_and_get(dev);
> if (ret < 0) {
> dev_err(dev, "couldn't enable module\n");
> - pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
> goto rpm_disable;
> }
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists