lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFT/PATCH] serial: omap: prevent resume if device is not suspended.
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:48:16PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:21:18AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:11:14PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:12:28AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:31:20AM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 09:30:29AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > > > > How is this happening? I think that needs proper investigation - or if
> > > > > > it's had more investigation, then the results needs to be included in
> > > > > > the commit description so that everyone can understand the issue here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We should not be resuming a device which hasn't been suspended. Maybe
> > > > > > the runtime PM enable sequence is wrong, and that's what should be fixed
> > > > > > instead?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This sequence in the probe() function:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > pm_runtime_irq_safe(&pdev->dev);
> > > > > > pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
> > > > > > pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > would enable runtime PM while the s/w state indicates that it's disabled,
> > > > > > and then that pm_runtime_get_sync() will want to resume the device. See
> > > > > > the section "5. Runtime PM Initialization, Device Probing and Removal"
> > > > > > in Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt, specifically the second paragraph
> > > > > > of that section.
> > > > >
> > > > > that was tested. It worked in pandaboard but didn't work on beagleboard
> > > > > XM. Sourav tried to start a discussion about that, but it simply died...
> > > > >
> > > > > In any case, pm_runtime_get_sync() in probe will always call
> > > > > runtime_resume callback, right ?
> > > >
> > > > Well, if the runtime PM state says it's suspended, and then you enable
> > > > runtime PM, the first call to pm_runtime_get_sync() will trigger a resume
> > > > attempt. The patch description is complaining about resume events without
> > > > there being a preceding suspend event.
> > > >
> > > > This could well be why.
> > >
> > > that's most likely, of course. But should we cause a regression to
> > > beagleboard XM because of that ?
> >
> > What would cause a regression on beagleboard XM? I have not suggested
> > any change other than more investigation of the issue and a fuller patch
> > description - yet you're screaming (idiotically IMHO) that mere
> > investigation would break beagleboard.
> >
> > Well, if it's _that_ fragile, that mere investigation of this issue by
> > someone elsewhere on the planet would break your beagleboard, maybe it
> > deserves to be broken!
>
> why are you always so over the top like that ? This is just
> counter-productive to say the least.

Because you are accusing me of potentially breaking your beagleboard
for merely suggesting further investigation and a better commit message.

You are the one going over the top, not me.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-25 13:01    [W:0.135 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site