lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ASoC: Intel: sst: Fix runtime PM imbalance in sst_power_control
From
Date


On 5/25/20 2:06 AM, Dinghao Liu wrote:
> When sst_load_fw() returns an error code, a pairing runtime
> PM usage counter decrement is needed to keep the counter
> balanced.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@zju.edu.cn>
> ---
> sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/sst_drv_interface.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/sst_drv_interface.c b/sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/sst_drv_interface.c
> index 762495385d5c..3897985b254f 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/sst_drv_interface.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/intel/atom/sst/sst_drv_interface.c
> @@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ static int sst_power_control(struct device *dev, bool state)
> if ((ctx->sst_state == SST_RESET) && (usage_count == 1)) {
> ret = sst_load_fw(ctx);
> if (ret) {
> + pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
> dev_err(dev, "FW download fail %d\n", ret);
> sst_set_fw_state_locked(ctx, SST_RESET);
> ret = sst_pm_runtime_put(ctx);

this change doesn't seem quite right, if you look the code below there
is no PM imbalance, is there?

int sst_pm_runtime_put(struct intel_sst_drv *sst_drv)
{
int ret;

pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(sst_drv->dev);
ret = pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(sst_drv->dev);
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
return 0;
}

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-26 17:35    [W:0.056 / U:53.712 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site