[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0iLGY-qoj7+p8mQqgEs6_TZkH6934qq+xs7EJSgUObyQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2022 21:37:38 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com>,
Axe Yang <axe.yang@...iatek.com>,
Chaotian Jing <chaotian.jing@...iatek.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM: runtime: Extend support for wakeirq for force_suspend|resume
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 1:16 PM Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> wrote:
>
> * Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> [220608 15:26]:
> > A driver that makes use of pm_runtime_force_suspend|resume() to support
> > system suspend/resume, currently needs to manage the wakeirq support
> > itself. To avoid the boilerplate code in the driver's system suspend/resume
> > callbacks in particular, let's extend pm_runtime_force_suspend|resume() to
> > deal with the wakeirq.
>
> Looks good to me:
>
> Reviewed-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Applied (as 5.20 material), but there is still a quite fundamental
problem with pm_runtime_force_suspend|resume() which is using
RPM_GET_CALLBACK() in these functions, because that macro returns a
middle-layer PM-runtime callback, so any bus type or PM domain
implementing meaningful generic power management ends up calling its
own PM-runtime callback from its system-wide PM callback which is
super-confusing at best.
Another problem with them is that they are generally not suitable for
devices that can wake up the system from sleep.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists