From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver core: Call pm_runtime_put_sync() only after device_remove()
Date: Fri, 12 May 2023 09:40:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZF3tUQFTeILXV_VT@hovoldconsulting.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0jvJT4JkHtO3RCUEzkfawxLCwR=QO2Y2CsL=cYN9s4hXw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 04:44:25PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 1:48 PM Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> wrote:
> > No, this seems like very bad idea and even violates the documentation
> > which clearly states that the usage counter is balanced before calling
> > remove() so that drivers can use pm_runtime_suspend() to put devices
> > into suspended state.
>
> I missed that, sorry.
>
> > There's is really no good reason to even try to change as this is in no
> > way a fast path.
>
> Still, I think that while the "put" part needs to be done before
> device_remove(), the actual state change can be carried out later.
>
> So something like
>
> pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
>
> device_remove(dev);
>
> pm_runtime_suspend(dev);
>
> would generally work, wouldn't it?
No, as drivers typically disable runtime pm in their remove callbacks,
that pm_runtime_suspend() would amount to a no-op (and calling the
driver pm ops post unbind and the driver having freed its data would
not work either).
Johan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-12 7:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-11 7:34 [PATCH] driver core: Call pm_runtime_put_sync() only after device_remove() Uwe Kleine-König
2023-05-11 10:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-05-11 10:39 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2023-05-11 11:48 ` Johan Hovold
2023-05-11 14:44 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-05-12 7:40 ` Johan Hovold [this message]
2023-05-12 14:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-05-12 15:00 ` Johan Hovold
2023-05-12 15:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2023-05-12 18:49 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2023-05-17 8:28 ` Johan Hovold
2023-05-17 9:55 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2023-05-11 14:46 ` Uwe Kleine-König
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=ZF3tUQFTeILXV_VT@hovoldconsulting.com \
--to=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
/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