From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
To: Sameer Pujar <spujar@nvidia.com>,
dan.j.williams@intel.com, vkoul@kernel.org
Cc: treding@nvidia.com, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [v2,2/2] dmaengine: tegra210-adma: update system sleep callbacks
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 10:49:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1466b97e-2cbd-9469-6646-fee85a7efa58@nvidia.com> (raw)
On 13/03/2019 10:40, Sameer Pujar wrote:
>
> On 3/13/2019 3:58 PM, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> On 13/03/2019 05:43, Sameer Pujar wrote:
>>> If the driver is active till late suspend, where runtime PM cannot run,
>>> force suspend is essential in such case to put the device in low power
>>> state. Thus pm_runtime_force_suspend and pm_runtime_force_resume are
>>> used as system sleep callbacks during system wide PM transitions.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sameer Pujar <spujar@nvidia.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c | 10 ++--------
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c b/drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c
>>> index 650cd9c..be29171 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c
>>> @@ -796,17 +796,11 @@ static int tegra_adma_remove(struct
>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>>> -static int tegra_adma_pm_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>> -{
>>> - return pm_runtime_suspended(dev) == false;
>>> -}
>>> -#endif
>>> -
>>> static const struct dev_pm_ops tegra_adma_dev_pm_ops = {
>>> SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(tegra_adma_runtime_suspend,
>>> tegra_adma_runtime_resume, NULL)
>>> - SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(tegra_adma_pm_suspend, NULL)
>>> + SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pm_runtime_force_suspend,
>>> + pm_runtime_force_resume)
>>> };
>> Looking at our downstream kernel we use LATE_SYSTEM_SLEEP for these. Any
>> reason why you changed this?
> I think, I just wanted to replace function calls for system sleep here
> and probably did
> not see exactly what we have in downstream kernel at that point. Looking
> at the commit
> log in downstream, it might qualify for separate patch.
> Let me know if you think, its better to add here.
I see no reason to change this from what we have been using and testing
downstream. I don't think that this warrants yet another patch for this.
Furthermore, the changelog references 'late' so it does not seem to
align with the change itself.
Cheers
Jon
next reply other threads:[~2019-03-13 10:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-13 10:49 Jon Hunter [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-03-13 10:56 [v2,2/2] dmaengine: tegra210-adma: update system sleep callbacks Sameer Pujar
2019-03-13 10:40 Sameer Pujar
2019-03-13 10:28 Jon Hunter
2019-03-13 5:43 Sameer Pujar
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=1466b97e-2cbd-9469-6646-fee85a7efa58@nvidia.com \
--to=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=spujar@nvidia.com \
--cc=treding@nvidia.com \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox