Re: [PATCH v1] PCI / PM: Really allow runtime PM without callback functions

Mika Westerberg
2024-02-26T07:42:03Z

On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 09:35:37AM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:15:29PM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:58:00AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 08:58:48AM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> > > > On 2/13/24 22:06, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > > Debugged-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Sounds like this resolves a problem report? Is there a URL we can
> > > > > cite? If not, at least a mention of what the user-visible problem is?
> > > > >
> > > > > From the c5eb1190074c commit log, it sounds like maybe this allows
> > > > > devices to be autosuspended when they previously could not be?
> > > > >
> > > > > Possibly this should have "Fixes: c5eb1190074c ("PCI / PM: Allow
> > > > > runtime PM without callback functions")" since it sounds like it goes
> > > > > with it?
> > > > >
> > > > I don't think there's known regression but my above commit wasn't complete.
> > > > Autosuspending works without runtime PM callback as long as the driver has
> > > > the PM callbacks structure set.
> > >
> > > I didn't suggest there was a regression, but if we mention that Mika
> > > debugged something, I want to know what the something was.
> >
> > Considering it's not a bug to begin with, perhaps we can change it to
> > Suggested-by or Co-developed-by?
>
> Hi Mika,
>
> If you are okay with this, please let me know and perhaps suggest a better
> fit for the scenario.

You can just drop my name from it completely.