From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
To: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
Cc: Sameer Pujar <spujar@nvidia.com>,
pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com, perex@perex.cz,
alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, thierry.reding@gmail.com,
rlokhande@nvidia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ALSA: hda/tegra: enable clock during probe
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:58:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <s5hef90zvo0.wl-tiwai@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b64f5d05-f352-7b46-d70d-3809aab8ddda@nvidia.com>
On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:26:27 +0100,
Jon Hunter wrote:
>
>
> On 25/01/2019 12:40, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:36:00 +0100,
> > Jon Hunter wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 24/01/2019 19:08, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 18:36:43 +0100,
> >>> Sameer Pujar wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> If CONFIG_PM is disabled or runtime PM calls are forbidden, the clocks
> >>>> will not be ON. This could cause issue during probe, where hda init
> >>>> setup is done. This patch checks whether runtime PM is enabled or not.
> >>>> If disabled, clocks are enabled in probe() and disabled in remove()
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch does following minor changes as cleanup,
> >>>> * return code check for pm_runtime_get_sync() to take care of failure
> >>>> and exit gracefully.
> >>>> * In remove path runtime PM is disabled before calling snd_card_free().
> >>>> * hda_tegra_disable_clocks() is moved out of CONFIG_PM_SLEEP check.
> >>>> * runtime PM callbacks moved out of CONFIG_PM check
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sameer Pujar <spujar@nvidia.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Ravindra Lokhande <rlokhande@nvidia.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
> >>> (snip)
> >>>> @@ -555,6 +553,13 @@ static int hda_tegra_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>>> if (!azx_has_pm_runtime(chip))
> >>>> pm_runtime_forbid(hda->dev);
> >>>>
> >>>> + /* explicit resume if runtime PM is disabled */
> >>>> + if (!pm_runtime_enabled(hda->dev)) {
> >>>> + err = hda_tegra_runtime_resume(hda->dev);
> >>>> + if (err)
> >>>> + goto out_free;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> schedule_work(&hda->probe_work);
> >>>
> >>> Calling runtime_resume here is really confusing...
> >>
> >> Why? IMO it is better to have a single handler for resuming the device
> >> and so if RPM is not enabled we call the handler directly. This is what
> >> we have been advised to do in the past and do in other drivers. See ...
> >
> > The point is that we're not "resuming" anything there. It's in the
> > early probe stage, and the device state is uninitialized, not really
> > suspended. It'd end up with just calling the same helper
> > (hda_tegra_enable_clocks()), though.
>
> Yes and you can make the same argument for every driver that calls
> pm_runtime_get_sync() during probe to turn on clocks, handle resets,
> etc, because at the end of the day the very first call to
> pm_runtime_get_sync() invokes the runtime_resume callback, when we have
> never been suspended.
Although there are some magical pm_runtime_*() in some places, most of
such pm_runtime_get_sync() is for the actual runtime PM management (to
prevent the runtime suspend), while the code above is for explicitly
setting up something for non-PM cases.
And if pm_runtime_get_sync() is obviously superfluous, we should
remove such calls. Really.
> Yes at the end of the day it is the same and given that we have done
> this elsewhere I think it is good to be consistent if/where we can.
The code becomes less readable, and that's a good reason against it :)
thanks,
Takashi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-25 13:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-24 17:36 [PATCH] ALSA: hda/tegra: enable clock during probe Sameer Pujar
2019-01-24 19:08 ` Takashi Iwai
2019-01-25 7:08 ` Sameer Pujar
2019-01-25 11:36 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-25 12:40 ` Takashi Iwai
2019-01-25 13:26 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-25 13:58 ` Takashi Iwai [this message]
2019-01-25 14:04 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-28 6:06 ` Sameer Pujar
2019-01-30 9:35 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-30 10:39 ` Takashi Iwai
2019-01-30 10:56 ` Sameer Pujar
2019-01-30 12:24 ` Jon Hunter
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=s5hef90zvo0.wl-tiwai@suse.de \
--to=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
--cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=perex@perex.cz \
--cc=pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rlokhande@nvidia.com \
--cc=spujar@nvidia.com \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.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