On 09.11.2015 23:15, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Hi guys,

while handling the merge conflict for the designware-platdrv, I noticed
an asymmetry in the runtime PM handling. Currently, code looks like
this:

        if (dev->pm_runtime_disabled) {
                pm_runtime_forbid(&pdev->dev);
        } else {
                pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(&pdev->dev, 1000);
                pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(&pdev->dev);
                pm_runtime_set_active(&pdev->dev);
                pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
        }

        r = i2c_dw_probe(dev);
        if (r) {
                pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
                return r;
        }

But shouldn't the above error path (and the remove path) also take
dev->pm_runtime_disabled into account and act accordingly?

I think you are right. Which brings another question to my mind do we need to have a patch to linux-stable too?

David: Your original commit 894acb2f823b ("i2c: designware: Add Intel Baytrail PMIC I2C bus support") doesn't add pm_runtime_disabled test to dw_i2c_remove(). I guess there is possibility power down the shared controller by having CONFIG_I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=m and then unloading the driver?

--
Jarkko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to