Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Question about suspend/resume clock handling in dwc3-of-simple.c | From | Guenter Roeck <> | Date | Tue, 13 Sep 2016 06:10:52 -0700 |
| |
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
| |