On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Lukas Wunner <lu...@wunner.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 02:58:34PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com>
>>
>> Prevent rpm_get_suppliers() from returning an error code if runtime
>> PM is disabled for one or more of the supplier devices it wants to
>> runtime-resume, so as to make runtime PM work for devices with links
>> to suppliers that don't use runtime PM (such links may be created
>> during device enumeration even before it is known whether or not
>> runtime PM will be enabled for the devices in question, for example).
>>
>> Reported-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hun...@intel.com>
>> Fixes: 21d5c57b3726 (PM / runtime: Use device links)
>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/base/power/runtime.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> Index: linux-pm/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
>> +++ linux-pm/drivers/base/power/runtime.c
>> @@ -276,7 +276,8 @@ static int rpm_get_suppliers(struct devi
>> continue;
>>
>> retval = pm_runtime_get_sync(link->supplier);
>> - if (retval < 0) {
>> + /* Ignore suppliers with disabled runtime PM. */
>> + if (retval < 0 && retval != -EACCES) {
>> pm_runtime_put_noidle(link->supplier);
>> return retval;
>> }
>>
>
> You could alternatively call pm_runtime_get_sync() under the condition
> link->supplier->power.disable_depth > 0 but then the usage_count wouldn't
> be incremented and I guess we want that in case runtime PM is only
> temporarily disabled and later enabled, right?
Right.
Thanks,
Rafael
