From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: PM regression with commit 5de85b9d57ab PM runtime re-init in v4.5-rc1 Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:36:04 -0800 Message-ID: <20160203163604.GH19432@atomide.com> References: <20160202210345.GZ19432@atomide.com> <20160202234626.GD19432@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Alan Stern , Ulf Hansson , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Kevin Hilman , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Linux OMAP Mailing List , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org * Rafael J. Wysocki [160203 05:07]: > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > Yes.. That works too. I guess the thing to consider is if we should > > make pm_runtime_put_sync() always sync along the lines of a patch > > I posted earlier today. That could avoid quite a bit of confusion > > as already seen in this thread :) > > No, we shouldn't. > > As I said, the current behavior is actually well documented (in > kerneldoc comments and elsewhere). OK. I'll do a series of fixes to the drivers using omap_device. Regards, Tony