From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.14]) (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 21D1C1BF28; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 07:35:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708932946; cv=none; b=YPTWLUlzBDTwAv869BEt0heGhVHh+Qk99vs9+MITWL5s8lojbJ5OHOSng0aMDa7I8YQ2v1m+8hJ7D8WNCBC07TPm93+QYbReHJZDyEdR5tgLJ6GX5KUwyMiyeaerMYtzBwbKLqbnO5JoHILUXAztwoVqZCAAhwDGvgQuZk/ymYA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708932946; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ea7JHUhie8Kli8vmxWmR/LWrRmbZu8hDvuuE7vFplkU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=OIXzaKdqkP84bdc7vwDzfztUFsW0LCGzITFQGP6JSf/1DbvdglslGEdHjxfNuJbPwCdR1vhQ+EvXWh4nSefvvMrYF0MT1cEhXWASj2GAqMEhigwzRuC0DFfjGZLe3C2buueFt5o+HLGC6XH1nesgkhrtvpK2ND6KpKEtHE5dz8A= 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=HFGl4nCL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 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="HFGl4nCL" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1708932945; x=1740468945; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=ea7JHUhie8Kli8vmxWmR/LWrRmbZu8hDvuuE7vFplkU=; b=HFGl4nCLlLqFuL61V3CWNUmE+aPohHkFRuCr7RRsHTjGM5nUmYKmUMj7 tNbuzBmWpnYmbJ4UbCyYWfu2VBympTlCZdF3MHyRQfWAf/zYKeEIN52eW tDPMNsHHfx24FqEVDUwtaeAtw/IzCyEkFi6r0ciWndhxePTsmWuBqdw9M YTQGRNq6VxdgJ/sIofc7Eg/WwTQ5a4Vj6jO+lu/h0zD7oqp+uYCG84Mq7 VI9C4M9DjzOqWkkwjwbKZDUntQ6Fk8l6kNGWxxHdv4beYBeNNs6VuHVCD HRlGtnBUN1PMnqdIwiNd82sJ96NTxGdio/o3gZBpF8NH5iftsaVg53alM Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10995"; a="3366131" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,185,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="3366131" Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmvoesa108.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Feb 2024 23:35:44 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10995"; a="937029406" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,185,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="937029406" Received: from black.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.28]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Feb 2024 23:35:40 -0800 Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 09:35:37 +0200 From: Raag Jadav To: Bjorn Helgaas , mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com 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-kernel@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: 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 > > > > > > > > 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. Raag