On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 3:23 AM Charles Keepax <ckeepax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 11:54:40AM -0500, Adam Ford wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 11:48 AM Charles Keepax > > <ckeepax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 04:24:31PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 02:57:30PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 08:12:56AM -0500, Adam Ford wrote: > > > > > > I applied this, and it appears to make the issue go away on a 5.15 > > > > > > kernel. I haven't tried it on a 5.18 yet. If this fixes the issue, > > > > > > would that be an acceptable solution to push upstream? > > > > > > > > > Feels like those operations should be runtime PM, like there is > > > > > no reason to keep the CODEC in a high power state than necessary. > > > > > > > > The issue Adam reported was suspending during playback - if you suspend > > > > during playback or capture the device is not idle at the point where we > > > > start trying to suspend so it shouldn't be in runtime suspend and won't > > > > by default be runtime suspended by the PM core. > > > > > > Yeah in my head snd_soc_suspend would have been called which > > > would (assuming the DAI doesn't have ignore_suspend set) shut > > > down the DAPM graph for the audio route, causing the runtime > > > references to all be released and the CODEC to be suspended > > > through runtime_pm. Not sure if I missed something there, and > > > that also allows for systems where the CODEC doesn't suspend > > > during system suspend. That said guess there probably arn't > > > any use-cases for that on wm8962 and I am more than happy to > > > use the force_suspend ops if you are happy with it. > > > > I am not familiar with this driver or the force_suspend ops, so I am > > not sure if there are going to be side-effects. > > I don't mind collecting more data if it's helpful. I probably won't > > be able to add more debug info until this weekend at the earliest. > > > > Nah, its good your ok to upstream your out of tree patch, just > making sure I fill in the holes in my knowledge with Mark :-) I'd like to push the patch with a Fixes tag, but I am not sure that we have a definitive hash to use. Ideally, it'd get backported, but I am not sure that I have the means to test it, because the hardware platform I have doesn't go back that far. Any thoughts? If not, I'll just push it without a fixes tag. adam > > Thanks, > Charles
