Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Friday, September 22, 2017 9:22:47 AM CEST Ulf Hansson wrote: > [...] > > >>> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend" phase of > >>> system > >>> suspend is fishy even when their runtime PM is disabled, because that > >>> doesn't > >>> guarantee anything regarding their

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Friday, September 22, 2017 9:22:47 AM CEST Ulf Hansson wrote: > [...] > > >>> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend" phase of > >>> system > >>> suspend is fishy even when their runtime PM is disabled, because that > >>> doesn't > >>> guarantee anything regarding their

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

[...] >>> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend" phase of system >>> suspend is fishy even when their runtime PM is disabled, because that >>> doesn't >>> guarantee anything regarding their children or possible consumers. Runtime >>> PM may still be enabled for those

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

[...] >>> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend" phase of system >>> suspend is fishy even when their runtime PM is disabled, because that >>> doesn't >>> guarantee anything regarding their children or possible consumers. Runtime >>> PM may still be enabled for those

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Thursday, September 21, 2017 4:36:30 PM CEST Alan Stern wrote: > On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:39:30AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Thursday, September 21, 2017 4:36:30 PM CEST Alan Stern wrote: > On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:39:30AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > E.g. an audio

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Thursday, September 21, 2017 11:27:13 AM CEST Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:39:30AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > > > > > E.g. an audio codec could keep running > > > while the i2c

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Thursday, September 21, 2017 11:27:13 AM CEST Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:39:30AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > > > > > E.g. an audio codec could keep running > > > while the i2c bus used to

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:39:30AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > > > > > E.g. an audio codec could keep running > > > while the i2c bus used to program its

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Thu, 21 Sep 2017, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:39:30AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > > > > > E.g. an audio codec could keep running > > > while the i2c bus used to program its registers can be

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:39:30AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > > > E.g. an audio codec could keep running > > while the i2c bus used to program its registers can be runtime suspended. > > If this is correct I

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:39:30AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > > > > E.g. an audio codec could keep running > > while the i2c bus used to program its registers can be runtime suspended. > > If this is correct I think it would be

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Alan Stern wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2017, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> >> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend" phase of >> >> system >> >> suspend is fishy even when their runtime PM is disabled, because that >>

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Alan Stern wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2017, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> >> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend" phase of >> >> system >> >> suspend is fishy even when their runtime PM is disabled, because that >> >> doesn't >> >> guarantee

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 04:01:32PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> > On 20 September 2017 at 02:26, Rafael J. Wysocki

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 04:01:32PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> > On 20 September 2017 at 02:26, Rafael J. Wysocki >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Second, leaving devices in

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 04:01:32PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > On 20 September 2017 at 02:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> > >> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend"

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 04:01:32PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > On 20 September 2017 at 02:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> > >> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend" phase of system > >> suspend is fishy even

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, 20 Sep 2017, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend" phase of system > >> suspend is fishy even when their runtime PM is disabled, because that > >> doesn't > >> guarantee anything regarding their children or possible consumers. Runtime

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, 20 Sep 2017, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> Second, leaving devices in runtime suspend in the "suspend" phase of system > >> suspend is fishy even when their runtime PM is disabled, because that > >> doesn't > >> guarantee anything regarding their children or possible consumers. Runtime

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 20 September 2017 at 02:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki >> >> It quite often is necessary to resume devices from runtime suspend >> during

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 20 September 2017 at 02:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki >> >> It quite often is necessary to resume devices from runtime suspend >> during system suspend for various reasons (for example, if their >> wakeup

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On 20 September 2017 at 02:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > It quite often is necessary to resume devices from runtime suspend > during system suspend for various reasons (for example, if their > wakeup settings need to be

Re: [PATCH] PM: Document rules on using pm_runtime_resume() in system suspend callbacks

On 20 September 2017 at 02:26, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > It quite often is necessary to resume devices from runtime suspend > during system suspend for various reasons (for example, if their > wakeup settings need to be changed), but that requires middle-layer > or