All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com>
To: Andy Gross <agross@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Ivan T. Ivanov" <iivanov@mm-sol.com>,
	"linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: qup: Fix order of runtime pm initialization
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 13:03:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140930200329.GV28481@sonymobile.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140930195923.GB26928@qualcomm.com>

On Tue 30 Sep 12:59 PDT 2014, Andy Gross wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 06:53:24PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > On Mon 29 Sep 15:00 PDT 2014, Andy Gross wrote:
> > 
> > > The runtime pm calls need to be done before populating the children via the
> > > i2c_add_adapter call.  If this is not done, a child can run into issues trying
> > > to do i2c read/writes due to the pm_runtime_sync failing.
> > > 
> > 
> > May I ask in what case this would fail?  I thought we tested this as we found
> > the faulty error check after calling pm_runtime_get_sync().
> 
> This is a different kind of failure.   If during probe, the children do some I2C
> activity, they will encounter issues with the runtime_sync due to the pm_runtime
> not being initialized.  However, once the qup probe completes, everything works
> fine.
> 
> The original runtime_sync issue revolved around the runtime_sync return value
> being misinterpreted due to the incorrect check.
> 

Yeah, I just wondered why my testing didn't trigger this. But I suspect that
the answer is simply that the client I ran with did not do i2c accesses from
probe.

Regards,
Bjorn

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com (Bjorn Andersson)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] i2c: qup: Fix order of runtime pm initialization
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 13:03:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140930200329.GV28481@sonymobile.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140930195923.GB26928@qualcomm.com>

On Tue 30 Sep 12:59 PDT 2014, Andy Gross wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 06:53:24PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > On Mon 29 Sep 15:00 PDT 2014, Andy Gross wrote:
> > 
> > > The runtime pm calls need to be done before populating the children via the
> > > i2c_add_adapter call.  If this is not done, a child can run into issues trying
> > > to do i2c read/writes due to the pm_runtime_sync failing.
> > > 
> > 
> > May I ask in what case this would fail?  I thought we tested this as we found
> > the faulty error check after calling pm_runtime_get_sync().
> 
> This is a different kind of failure.   If during probe, the children do some I2C
> activity, they will encounter issues with the runtime_sync due to the pm_runtime
> not being initialized.  However, once the qup probe completes, everything works
> fine.
> 
> The original runtime_sync issue revolved around the runtime_sync return value
> being misinterpreted due to the incorrect check.
> 

Yeah, I just wondered why my testing didn't trigger this. But I suspect that
the answer is simply that the client I ran with did not do i2c accesses from
probe.

Regards,
Bjorn

  reply	other threads:[~2014-09-30 20:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-09-29 22:00 [PATCH] i2c: qup: Fix order of runtime pm initialization Andy Gross
2014-09-29 22:00 ` Andy Gross
2014-09-29 22:49 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-09-29 22:49   ` Felipe Balbi
2014-09-29 22:49   ` Felipe Balbi
     [not found] ` <1412028051-21774-1-git-send-email-agross-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
2014-09-30  1:53   ` Bjorn Andersson
2014-09-30  1:53     ` Bjorn Andersson
2014-09-30  1:53     ` Bjorn Andersson
2014-09-30 19:59     ` Andy Gross
2014-09-30 19:59       ` Andy Gross
2014-09-30 20:03       ` Bjorn Andersson [this message]
2014-09-30 20:03         ` Bjorn Andersson
2014-10-03  1:21 ` Wolfram Sang
2014-10-03  1:21   ` Wolfram Sang

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=20140930200329.GV28481@sonymobile.com \
    --to=bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com \
    --cc=agross@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=iivanov@mm-sol.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    /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.