lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Question about suspend/resume clock handling in dwc3-of-simple.c
From
Date
On 09/12/2016 10:35 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> writes:
>>>> Should it be clk_disable_unprepare(), or maybe something like the
>>>> following
>>>>
>>>> if (!pm_runtime_status_suspended(dev))
>>>> clk_disable_unprepare();
>>>> else
>>>> clk_unprepare();
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how balanced those calls are, yeah. I don't have HW to test
>>> PM with. But note that as it is, there is no actual runtime PM support,
>>> so clk_disable_unprepare() will always be necessary.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we will find further issues when someone tries to use runtime PM
>>> with dwc3-of-simple. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> We are working on code derived from it, so unless I can convince the author
>> that he can not just use clk_unprepare() I suspect we'll hit the problem.
>> If so, I'll let you know.
>
> Are you sending that upstream? Depending on your requirements, it might
> be easier to patch dwc3-of-simple.c then adding yet another glue layer :-)
>
Yes. It will be a glue layer. So far that looks like the cleanest solution.

Thanks,
Guenter

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-17 09:59    [W:0.055 / U:0.612 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site