On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 07:57:46AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > On 7/30/19 6:21 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 05:07:39PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > > On 7/26/19 2:08 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 01:08:57PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > > > > > > - if (ret < 0) > > > > > + if (ret < 0 && ret != -EACCES) > > > > > > > > ...and here, the pm_runtime_put_noidle() call is missed. > > > > > > yes but in the example you provided, they actually do more work than just > > > decrement the device usage counter: > > > > In their case they would like to do that. You decide what is appropriate call > > in your case. > > > > My point is, that reference counter in case of error handling should be > > returned back to its value. > > Agree on the reference count. > I am however not clear on the next step and 'what is appropriate'. > > If pm_runtime_get_sync() failed, then technically the device was not resumed Not so straight. It depends on reference count. It might be true (most cases I think), or not true, if device had been resumed previously by other call. > so marking it as last_busy+autosuspend, or using a plain vanilla put() will > not result in any action. I must be missing something here. put_noidle(). Because if it failed on the first call and was resumed, put() will try to shut it down (since reference count goes to no-user base). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
