[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2572220e-57d0-4f10-1695-bfeab54de38d@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 11:11:03 -0500
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: alsa-devel@...a-project.org, kai.vehmanen@...ux.intel.com,
cgel.zte@...il.com, Zeal Robot <zealci@....com.cn>,
lgirdwood@...il.com, Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>,
ranjani.sridharan@...ux.intel.com, daniel.baluta@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sound-open-firmware@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: SOF: using pm_runtime_resume_and_get to simplify
the code
On 4/20/22 10:23, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 08:28:31AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> On 4/19/22 22:03, cgel.zte@...il.com wrote:
>>> From: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@....com.cn>
>
>>> Using pm_runtime_resume_and_get() to replace pm_runtime_get_sync and
>>> pm_runtime_put_noidle. This change is just to simplify the code, no
>>> actual functional changes.
>
>> Well, maybe that's a simplification, but we've been using the same pattern for years now.
>
>> Is there really a clear direction to use this new function?
>
> It seems like a much better pattern and there's been a steady stream of
> conversion patches. The whole get/idle thing is pretty much just sharp
> edges.
>
>> the overwhelming majority of drivers in sound/soc still rely on the pm_runtime_get_sync (111 v. 7).
>
> We'll get there I'm sure.
ok, I'll send follow-up patches for the remaining code.
For this patch:
Acked-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists