From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B72266A002; Wed, 14 Feb 2024 20:15:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707941732; cv=none; b=VHotL0qo5VVhykxXfCo9uk16TPh/ukQ6QaWuW4AzweYQAfhH1jHLWWIZOKBZwhlnxAKMNkJl8LiqsgLuRGcysWivjwerDeXt2jr6f2xkDxs6kncjTvNbUpzzUfUlbPIHXWrP9fAhj/eyYaDv7RyeBvtatcMkkV8P1nFs0hJJ0uA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707941732; c=relaxed/simple; bh=S7sJcFnlsbs0MGKDPZKtduFzZYfiU4c1U499OJDfDzo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=PNEnAebrp4FMoo6w3g7XtgK0FaYXPdCoVOZ7UHzBl3Qb8/FNPMA/NxWdr3fQStXs856N/Ve/MobFSOlbPCmiIyyR9joJtN+gGYME20s9mzePmXuYut/wk3BqF7m34ODMHkSwdz7WpIAQhYW1I/1g9yDeCifhxUZUIVHFq7ijvCg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=S0dTkQZS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="S0dTkQZS" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1707941731; x=1739477731; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=S7sJcFnlsbs0MGKDPZKtduFzZYfiU4c1U499OJDfDzo=; b=S0dTkQZSG2kJ7Yoy4rWBKYWdyBHHICdGJYoXY97HzjN+0LW43itXRWKj qcOS7YZTYJ6xoS/G1IoG/N5xx3k5dFG93prb/naV8NkowA8SfDERaZwlU ynrV9VwVk8j0HWvWfoNiyaUaojO33qcY3v4b5lsvDO4tAJMBALuCSGOP9 olgJdx7W7Kr2v6lFt2q2VoH5jjv6k8Ag7iDjHQ3BRBLITFBpqxZJLnsOC Qpg9pqkh/YU2JhGmjLoo2s+z0pgqQr2yYoDij8VxUJ0oVLk7FHUo3E/O8 JZKpqW5QBDoYYSQK315DaXm9lJoiz55Gpn/EpTr/0UdqD9Hg9aU0RNNrD Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10984"; a="1881636" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,160,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="1881636" Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmvoesa113.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Feb 2024 12:15:30 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10984"; a="935617834" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,160,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="935617834" Received: from black.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.28]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Feb 2024 12:15:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 22:15:23 +0200 From: Raag Jadav To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Jarkko Nikula , bhelgaas@google.com, mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, stanislaw.gruszka@linux.intel.com, lukas@wunner.de, rafael@kernel.org, ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, sashal@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] PCI / PM: Really allow runtime PM without callback functions Message-ID: References: <93c77778-fbdc-4345-be8b-04959d1ce929@linux.intel.com> <20240214165800.GA1254628@bhelgaas> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240214165800.GA1254628@bhelgaas> 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 > > > > > > 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? Raag