From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 10:38:45 +0000 Subject: [PATCH 01/35] mfd: ab8500-gpadc: Implemented suspend/resume In-Reply-To: References: <1360933026-30325-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1360933026-30325-2-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <20130220131912.GB13049@sirena.org.uk> Message-ID: <20130222103306.GA19796@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:45:08PM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 20 February 2013 14:19, Mark Brown > > This doesn't look especially sane... You're doing a runtime get, taking > > the lock without releasing it and disabling the regulator. This is > > *very* odd, both the changelog and the code need to explain what's going > > on and why it's safe in a lot more detail here. > You need to do pm_runtime_get_sync to be able to make sure resources > (which seems to be only the regulator) are safe to switch off. To my > understanding this is a generic way to use for being able to switch > off resources at a device suspend when runtime pm is used in > conjunction. Are you sure this actually does what you think it does, especially when run on modern kernels? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: