From: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>
To: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mfd: intel-lpss: Avoid resuming runtime-suspended lpss unnecessarily
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 09:42:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1475048574.4635.1.camel@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6e14fa9659f23da041bc5e65edcd53c3e4845c74.1475032126.git.yu.c.chen@intel.com>
On Wed, 2016-09-28 at 11:28 +0800, Chen Yu wrote:
> So first try is to use pm_request_resume() instead, to make the
> runtime
> resume process asynchronously. Unfortunately the asynchronous runtime
> resume relies on pm_wq, which is freezed at early stage. So we choose
> another method, that is to avoid resuming runtime-suspended devices,
> if they are already runtime suspended. This is safe because for LPSS
> driver, the runtime suspend and system suspend are of the same
> hook - i.e., intel_lpss_suspend(). And moreover, this device is
> neither runtime wakeup source nor system wakeup source.
I agree with the reasoning but I don't see the specificity to LPSS.
Shouldn't this go into the core?
Regards
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-28 7:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-28 3:26 [PATCH 0/2] Define positive return value to RPM_SUSPEND for runtime-suspended devices Chen Yu
2016-09-28 3:26 ` [PATCH 1/2] PM / sleep: Return RPM_SUSPENDED to keep devices in runtime-suspended Chen Yu
2016-09-28 11:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-09-28 14:58 ` Chen Yu
2016-09-28 3:28 ` [PATCH 2/2] mfd: intel-lpss: Avoid resuming runtime-suspended lpss unnecessarily Chen Yu
2016-09-28 7:42 ` Oliver Neukum [this message]
2016-09-28 8:09 ` Chen Yu
2016-09-28 8:19 ` Oliver Neukum
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1475048574.4635.1.camel@suse.com \
--to=oneukum@suse.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.