From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sekhar Nori Subject: Re: [PATCH v9] ARM: omap: edma: add suspend resume hook Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 20:33:39 +0530 Message-ID: <546A0E4B.5000901@ti.com> References: <1409043173-24357-1-git-send-email-zonque@gmail.com> <546635DB.4020202@ti.com> <546636C3.8070202@zonque.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from arroyo.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.40]:54135 "EHLO arroyo.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753081AbaKQPEJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Nov 2014 10:04:09 -0500 In-Reply-To: <546636C3.8070202@zonque.org> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Mack , d-gerlach@ti.com Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, tony@atomide.com, nm@ti.com On Friday 14 November 2014 10:37 PM, Daniel Mack wrote: > Hi Sekhar, > > On 11/14/2014 06:03 PM, Sekhar Nori wrote: >> I think I have asked this before, and I am still not sure why this call >> to pm_runtime_get_sync() is needed here. From my testing today, this >> does seem to be a a no-op and this call returns from rpm_resume() >> because of this check: >> >> else if (dev->power.disable_depth == 1 && dev->power.is_suspended >> && dev->power.runtime_status == RPM_ACTIVE) >> retval = 1; > > Yes. IIRC, it was in fact not needed. > >> So, AFAICS, the net effect is an increment of dev->power.usage_count >> (which is already greater than 0) and its subsequent decrement at the >> end of the function. >> >> After removing this call I did not see any EDMA malfunction as well >> (can access MMC/SD just fine after suspend/resume cycle). >> >> So, any objections to merging this patch with the attached hunk >> applied? > > Looks good to me, we can still add it back later if it turns out to be > needed. Okay, thanks for the confirmation. Regards, Sekhar From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nsekhar@ti.com (Sekhar Nori) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 20:33:39 +0530 Subject: [PATCH v9] ARM: omap: edma: add suspend resume hook In-Reply-To: <546636C3.8070202@zonque.org> References: <1409043173-24357-1-git-send-email-zonque@gmail.com> <546635DB.4020202@ti.com> <546636C3.8070202@zonque.org> Message-ID: <546A0E4B.5000901@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Friday 14 November 2014 10:37 PM, Daniel Mack wrote: > Hi Sekhar, > > On 11/14/2014 06:03 PM, Sekhar Nori wrote: >> I think I have asked this before, and I am still not sure why this call >> to pm_runtime_get_sync() is needed here. From my testing today, this >> does seem to be a a no-op and this call returns from rpm_resume() >> because of this check: >> >> else if (dev->power.disable_depth == 1 && dev->power.is_suspended >> && dev->power.runtime_status == RPM_ACTIVE) >> retval = 1; > > Yes. IIRC, it was in fact not needed. > >> So, AFAICS, the net effect is an increment of dev->power.usage_count >> (which is already greater than 0) and its subsequent decrement at the >> end of the function. >> >> After removing this call I did not see any EDMA malfunction as well >> (can access MMC/SD just fine after suspend/resume cycle). >> >> So, any objections to merging this patch with the attached hunk >> applied? > > Looks good to me, we can still add it back later if it turns out to be > needed. Okay, thanks for the confirmation. Regards, Sekhar