>> @@ -2342,11 +2350,19 @@ static int pl022_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>> +
>> +static int pl022_runtime_idle(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + pm_runtime_suspend(dev);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> #endif
>>
>> static const struct dev_pm_ops pl022_dev_pm_ops = {
>> SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pl022_suspend, pl022_resume)
>> - SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(pl022_runtime_suspend, pl022_runtime_resume, NULL)
>> + SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(pl022_runtime_suspend,
>> + pl022_runtime_resume,
>> + pl022_runtime_idle)
>
> This is an unnecessary change.
>
> The bus-level ops runtime PM ops call pm_generic_runtime_idle() when
> its 'runtime_idle' operation is invoked. Let's look at the code
> there:
>
> int pm_generic_runtime_idle(struct device *dev)
> {
> const struct dev_pm_ops *pm = dev->driver ? dev->driver->pm : NULL;
>
> if (pm && pm->runtime_idle) {
> int ret = pm->runtime_idle(dev);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> }
>
> pm_runtime_suspend(dev);
> return 0;
> }
>
> If the driver has a NULL runtime idle, then generic code will call
> pm_runtime_suspend() for the device. So, adding a runtime_idle callback
> to a driver to explicitly call pm_runtime_suspend() is not required.
>
You are somewhat correct. But the patch is still needed as is!
Reason is simply that after a probe, driver core is calling
pm_runtime_put_sync. This will not go through the
pm_generic_runtime_idle function, but directly to __pm_runtime_idle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Save $700 by Nov 18
Register now
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1
_______________________________________________
spi-devel-general mailing list
spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spi-devel-general
