Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] PM / Domains: Call driver's noirq callbacks | From | Mikko Perttunen <> | Date | Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:04:03 +0300 |
| |
On 20.06.2017 15:47, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 20 June 2017 at 14:05, Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@nvidia.com> wrote: >> Currently genpd installs its own suspend_noirq and resume_noirq >> callbacks, but never calls down to the driver's corresponding >> callbacks. Add these calls. >> >> Signed-off-by: Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@nvidia.com> >> --- >> >> drivers/base/power/domain.c | 8 ++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/domain.c b/drivers/base/power/domain.c >> index d3f1d96f75e9..c3b6e6018c02 100644 >> --- a/drivers/base/power/domain.c >> +++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c >> @@ -925,6 +925,10 @@ static int pm_genpd_suspend_noirq(struct device *dev) >> return ret; >> } >> >> + ret = pm_generic_suspend_noirq(dev); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; > > Two things: > 1) I would move this a couple of lines further above, as to avoid > pm_runtime_force_suspend() from being called before, as it may suspend > the device before the noirq callbacks gets to run.
Sure.
> 2) pm_genpd_suspend_noirq() is also assigned to the ->poweroff_noirq() > callback. Certainly we don't want run the *suspend* variants of the > callback, but rather the *poweroff* variants in that case.
Ah, didn't notice this. Will fix.
Thanks for the comments, I'll post a v2. Mikko
> >> + >> genpd_lock(genpd); >> genpd->suspended_count++; >> genpd_sync_power_off(genpd, true, 0); >> @@ -958,6 +962,10 @@ static int pm_genpd_resume_noirq(struct device *dev) >> genpd->suspended_count--; >> genpd_unlock(genpd); >> >> + ret = pm_generic_resume_noirq(dev); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + >> if (genpd->dev_ops.stop && genpd->dev_ops.start) >> ret = pm_runtime_force_resume(dev); >> >> -- >> 2.1.4 >> > > Kind regards > Uffe >
| |