From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: "Lina Iyer" <lina.iyer@linaro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
"Ulf Hansson" <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
"Krzysztof Kozłowski" <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>,
"Linux PM list" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
msivasub@codeaurora.org, "Andy Gross" <agross@codeaurora.org>,
"Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] PM / Domains: Remove dev->driver check for runtime PM
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 20:40:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7hwpwylepx.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdVeffa-jgXuSjDQBKTrhgW-d87OKzs1iXX+4y-9U_AJbg@mail.gmail.com> (Geert Uytterhoeven's message of "Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:57:38 +0200")
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> writes:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org> wrote:
>> Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@linaro.org> writes:
>>
>>> Remove check for driver of a device, for runtime PM. Device may be
>>> suspended without an explicit driver. This check seems to be vestigial
>>> and incorrect in the current context.
>>
>> This one should probably have been RFC.
>>
>> For a little more context here, this was uncovered when experimenting
>> with using runtime PM for CPU devices which don't have a dev->driver.
>>
>> This check might have made sense before PM domains, but with PM domains,
>> it's entirely possible to have a simple device without a driver and the
>> PM domain handles all the necesary PM, so I think this check
>> could/should be removed.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> Simple devices without a driver aren't handled automatically.
> At minimum, the driver should call pm_runtime_enable(), cfr.
> drivers/bus/simple-pm-bus.c.
That's correct, and in the proof-of-concept stuff I hacked up and in
Lina's series, the CPU "devices" do indeed to this. Without that, they
wouldn't end up ever taking this codepath through genpd's
runtime_suspend and power_off hooks.
Also, I'm not sure if your comment was meant to be an objection to the
patch? or if you're OK with it.
Thanks for the feedback,
Kevin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: khilman@kernel.org (Kevin Hilman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/9] PM / Domains: Remove dev->driver check for runtime PM
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 20:40:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7hwpwylepx.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdVeffa-jgXuSjDQBKTrhgW-d87OKzs1iXX+4y-9U_AJbg@mail.gmail.com> (Geert Uytterhoeven's message of "Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:57:38 +0200")
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> writes:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:50 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org> wrote:
>> Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@linaro.org> writes:
>>
>>> Remove check for driver of a device, for runtime PM. Device may be
>>> suspended without an explicit driver. This check seems to be vestigial
>>> and incorrect in the current context.
>>
>> This one should probably have been RFC.
>>
>> For a little more context here, this was uncovered when experimenting
>> with using runtime PM for CPU devices which don't have a dev->driver.
>>
>> This check might have made sense before PM domains, but with PM domains,
>> it's entirely possible to have a simple device without a driver and the
>> PM domain handles all the necesary PM, so I think this check
>> could/should be removed.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> Simple devices without a driver aren't handled automatically.
> At minimum, the driver should call pm_runtime_enable(), cfr.
> drivers/bus/simple-pm-bus.c.
That's correct, and in the proof-of-concept stuff I hacked up and in
Lina's series, the CPU "devices" do indeed to this. Without that, they
wouldn't end up ever taking this codepath through genpd's
runtime_suspend and power_off hooks.
Also, I'm not sure if your comment was meant to be an objection to the
patch? or if you're OK with it.
Thanks for the feedback,
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-14 3:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 120+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-04 23:35 [PATCH 0/9] ARM: PM / Domains: Generic PM domains for CPUs/Clusters Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` [PATCH 1/9] PM / Domains: Allocate memory outside domain locks Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 19:47 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-12 19:47 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-09-01 12:40 ` Ulf Hansson
2015-09-01 12:40 ` Ulf Hansson
2015-08-04 23:35 ` [PATCH 2/9] PM / Domains: Remove dev->driver check for runtime PM Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 19:50 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-12 19:50 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-13 8:57 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-08-13 8:57 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-08-14 3:40 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2015-08-14 3:40 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-14 7:24 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-08-14 7:24 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-08-14 17:19 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-14 17:19 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-16 9:24 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-08-16 9:24 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-08-21 21:04 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-21 21:04 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-24 19:50 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-24 19:50 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-25 9:24 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-08-25 9:24 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-09-01 13:28 ` Ulf Hansson
2015-09-01 13:28 ` Ulf Hansson
2015-08-04 23:35 ` [PATCH 3/9] PM / Domains: Support IRQ safe PM domains Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 20:12 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-12 20:12 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-12 20:47 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 20:47 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 23:03 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-08-12 23:03 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-08-04 23:35 ` [PATCH 4/9] kernel/cpu_pm: fix cpu_cluster_pm_exit comment Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 20:13 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-12 20:13 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-04 23:35 ` [PATCH 5/9] ARM: common: Introduce PM domains for CPUs/clusters Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-06 3:14 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-06 3:14 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-07 23:45 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-07 23:45 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-11 13:07 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-08-11 13:07 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-08-11 15:58 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-11 15:58 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-11 20:12 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-11 20:12 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-11 22:29 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-11 22:29 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 19:00 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 19:00 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 17:29 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-13 17:29 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-13 20:12 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 20:12 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 22:01 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-13 22:01 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-14 14:38 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-14 14:38 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 19:00 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: domain: Add platform handlers for CPU PM domains Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 19:00 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 15:01 ` [PATCH 5/9] ARM: common: Introduce PM domains for CPUs/clusters Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-08-13 15:01 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-08-13 15:45 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 15:45 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 15:52 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-08-13 15:52 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-08-13 16:22 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 16:22 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-14 3:51 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-14 3:51 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-14 4:02 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-14 4:02 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-14 15:49 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-08-14 15:49 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-08-14 19:11 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-14 19:11 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-13 17:26 ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-13 17:26 ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-13 19:27 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 19:27 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-14 9:52 ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-14 9:52 ` Sudeep Holla
2015-08-04 23:35 ` [PATCH 6/9] ARM: domain: Add platform handlers for CPU PM domains Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-05 14:45 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-05 14:45 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-05 16:38 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-05 16:38 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-05 19:23 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-05 19:23 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-06 3:01 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-06 3:01 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-10 15:36 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-10 15:36 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` [PATCH 7/9] ARM: cpuidle: Add runtime PM support for CPU idle Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` [PATCH 8/9] ARM64: smp: Add runtime PM support for CPU hotplug Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` [PATCH 9/9] ARM: " Lina Iyer
2015-08-04 23:35 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 20:28 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-12 20:28 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-12 20:43 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-12 20:43 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-14 18:59 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-14 18:59 ` Kevin Hilman
2015-08-12 23:47 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-08-12 23:47 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-08-13 16:00 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 16:00 ` Lina Iyer
2015-08-13 19:18 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-08-13 19:18 ` Stephen Boyd
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=7hwpwylepx.fsf@deeprootsystems.com \
--to=khilman@kernel.org \
--cc=agross@codeaurora.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=k.kozlowski@samsung.com \
--cc=lina.iyer@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=msivasub@codeaurora.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
/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.