Hi Lorenzo, > > If that's really the case, then I can see how one device and it's > > children are suspended and the irq for it is disabled but the providing > > devices (clk, regulator, bus controller, etc.) are still fully active > > and not suspended but in fact completely usable and able to service > > interrupts. If that all makes sense, then I would answer the question > > with a definitive "yes it's all fine" because the clk consumer could be > > in the NOIRQ phase of its suspend but the clk provider wouldn't have > > even started suspending yet when clk_disable_unprepare() is called. > > That's a very good summary and address my concern, I still question this > patch correctness (and many others that carry out clk operations in S2R > NOIRQ phase), they may work but do not tell me they are rock solid given > your accurate summary above. I understand your concern but I don't see any alternative right now and a deep rework of the PM core to respect such dependency is not something that can be done in a reasonable amount of time. With regard to this constraint, do you think it is worth blocking the series? Thanks, Miquèl
