Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | "Poddar, Sourav" <> | Subject | RE: [RFT/PATCH] serial: omap: prevent resume if device is not suspended. | Date | Fri, 12 Oct 2012 17:29:55 +0000 |
| |
Hi Russell, ________________________________________ From: Russell King - ARM Linux [linux@arm.linux.org.uk] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 10:12 PM To: Kevin Hilman Cc: Poddar, Sourav; Paul Walmsley; Balbi, Felipe; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; tony@atomide.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Shilimkar, Santosh; linux-serial@vger.kernel.org; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; alan@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [RFT/PATCH] serial: omap: prevent resume if device is not suspended.
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 09:35:54AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Sourav <sourav.poddar@ti.com> writes: > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > > b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > > index 6ede6fd..3fbc7f7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c > > @@ -1414,6 +1414,7 @@ static int __devinit serial_omap_probe(struct > > platform_device *pdev) > > INIT_WORK(&up->qos_work, serial_omap_uart_qos_work); > > > > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, up); > > + pm_runtime_set_active(&pdev->dev); > > NAK. > > This will obviously break platforms where the UARTs are not active > before driver loads.
I thought I had proposed a solution for this issue, which was this sequence:
omap_device_enable(dev); pm_runtime_set_active(dev); pm_runtime_enable(dev);
Yes, I can understand people not liking the omap_device_enable() there, but I also notice that the email suggesting that never got a reply either - not even a "I tried this and it doesn't work" or "it does work". Sorry for the late reply on this. I tried this sequence and it worked perfectly fine on panda and beagle.
As such, it seems this issue isn't making any progress as we had already established that merely doing a "pm_runtime_set_active()" before "pm_runtime_enable()" was going to break other platforms.
I was trying to analyse your explanations on this and since omap_device_enable is not generally recommended, I was trying to see if anything else can be done to get around this.
I send this patch for N800 testing so as to see how it behaves. (We are suspecting that there might be mux setting issue also with N800).
~Sourav
| |