Re: [PATCH 03/10] PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency for non PM QoS devices

[Manikanta Maddireddy <mmaddireddy-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On 25-Nov-17 5:32 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Thierry Reding
> <thierry.reding-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 05:50:42PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Manikanta Maddireddy
>>> <mmaddireddy-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>> In 'commit 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS")'
>>>> PM QoS resume latency modified 0 as "no latency at all". However
>>>> dev_pm_qos_raw_read_value() returns 0 for devices which doesn't have
>>>> PM QoS constraints. This is blocking runtime suspend for these devices
>>>> in rpm_check_suspend_allowed(). Return PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY_NO_CONSTRAINT
>>>> when PM QoS constraints are not available for a particular device.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS")
>>>
>>> That commit has been reverted, so this patch is not applicable and
>>> therefore the whole series isn't.
>>>
>>> What kernel is it based off?
>>
>> It looks like this might have crept in via commit 0759e80b84e3 ("PM /
>> QoS: Fix device resume latency framework"). But checking more closely,
>> that commit actually incorporates this change already.
>>
>> According to the git log the correct commit for this showed up in
>> linux-next only today, which is probably why Manikanta missed it.
> 
> Well, it's been in the Linus' tree for a week, though.
> 
> Thanks,
> Rafael
> 
I dropped this patch in V2.

Thanks,
Manikanta
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html