From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:51:24 +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> <20130222103306.GA19796@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Message-ID: <20130225135123.GA28907@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:27:36AM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 22 February 2013 11:38, Mark Brown > > Are you sure this actually does what you think it does, especially when > > run on modern kernels? > Not sure, what you are thinking of more precisely here. Runtime pm has > been in the kernel for quite some time now. Yes, thanks - I was aware of that. The integration between runtime and system PM has been an area that's had some development though. > Anyway, to make it a bit clearer, we switch the regulator on/off at > the runtime suspend/resume callbacks. We want to take similar actions > in device suspend/resume. > To accomplish this a pm_runtime_get_sync is done in suspend and vice > verse in resume, otherwise you can not safely handle the regulator. Are you absolutely positive that with modern kernels your get actually resumes the device? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: