From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>
Cc: Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / QoS: Fix default runtime_pm device resume latency
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:27:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3227682.nATp9NGxKU@aspire.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0i8HMDfV907QDTD54YPaFpoBLVt+R4oeQ704+9_C8APoA@mail.gmail.com>
On Monday, October 30, 2017 11:19:08 AM CET Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com> wrote:
> > The recent change to the PM QoS framework to introduce a proper
> > no constraint value overlooked to handle the devices which don't
> > implement PM QoS OPS. Runtime PM is one of the more severely
> > impacted subsystems, failing every attempt to runtime suspend
> > a device. This leads into some nasty second level issues like
> > probe failures and increased power consumption among other things.
>
> Oh, that's bad.
>
> Sorry about breaking it and thanks for the fix!
>
> > Fix this by adding a proper return value for devices that don't
> > implement PM QoS implicitly.
> >
> > Fixes: 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS")
> > Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>
> Applied.
And pushed to Linus.
That said, probe shouldn't ever fail if PM QoS is set to the
"never suspend" value.
User space can set it that way, after all, so the drivers that fail to probe
in that case aren't correct I'm afraid.
Thanks,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-30 23:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-30 7:10 [PATCH] PM / QoS: Fix default runtime_pm device resume latency Tero Kristo
2017-10-30 10:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-30 23:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2017-10-31 7:13 ` Tero Kristo
2017-10-31 8:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-31 10:18 ` Tero Kristo
2017-10-31 13:09 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2017-10-31 13:10 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2017-10-31 13:55 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2017-10-31 14:04 ` Ulf Hansson
2017-10-31 16:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-31 15:37 ` Jani Nikula
2017-10-31 16:40 ` Daniel Vetter
2017-10-31 17:12 ` Laurent Pinchart
2017-10-31 17:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-31 18:07 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2017-10-31 22:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-11-01 10:28 ` Tero Kristo
2017-11-01 20:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-11-01 22:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3227682.nATp9NGxKU@aspire.rjw.lan \
--to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=t-kristo@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox