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: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 17:08:11 -0800 Message-ID: <20160205010810.GR19432@atomide.com> References: 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: Ulf Hansson Cc: Alan Stern , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "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 * Ulf Hansson [160204 14:35]: > On 4 February 2016 at 23:09, Alan Stern wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > >> I am really not questioning the autosuspend feature at all, it's a > >> really great feature! > >> > >> Now, I question the minor benefit we actually gain from having the > >> runtime PM core to update the mark in rpm_resume(). > > > > As Tony pointed out, it prevents some devices from going to sleep right > > away. > > Because their drivers don't care to update the last busy mark!? Nope. Without that devices may never resume at all so the drivers can't do anything about it. Regards, Tony