On wto, 2014-11-04 at 20:06 +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 4 November 2014 13:52, Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The AMBA bus driver defines runtime Power Management functions which > > disable and unprepare AMBA bus clock. This is problematic for runtime PM > > because unpreparing a clock might sleep so it is not interrupt safe. > > > > However some drivers may want to implement runtime PM functions in > > interrupt-safe way (see pm_runtime_irq_safe()). In such case the AMBA > > bus driver should only disable/enable the clock in runtime suspend and > > resume callbacks. > > > > Detect the device driver behavior during runtime suspend. During runtime > > resume deal with clocks according to stored value. > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/amba/bus.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++---- > > include/linux/amba/bus.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/amba/bus.c b/drivers/amba/bus.c > > index 47bbdc1b5be3..27ec8882ec8e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/amba/bus.c > > +++ b/drivers/amba/bus.c > > @@ -85,6 +85,13 @@ static struct device_attribute amba_dev_attrs[] = { > > }; > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_PM > > + > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME > > +#define get_pm_runtime_irq_safe(dev) ((dev)->power.irq_safe) > > +#else > > +#define get_pm_runtime_irq_safe(dev) 1 > > No, this doesn't work for those drivers that isn't configured as > irq_safe. The pm_runtime_force_suspend() invoked from the driver's > system PM suspend callback, will expect clocks to be unprepared when > CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME is unset. D'oh! You're right... > To address this issue, in principle we need to know whether the driver > has invoked pm_runtime_irq_safe(), even when CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME is > unset. > > This may be solved by the help of PM core: > 1) Move the irq_safe member in the struct dev_pm_info, outside the > #ifdef CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME. > 2) Let the pm_runtime_irq_safe() function be implemented for CONFIG_PM > instead of CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME. Before I'll start implementing this - could PM maintainers share their opinion on such change? Best regards, Krzysztof > If the PM core maintainers don't like that approach we can always add > an amba specific wrapper function for pm_runtime_irq_safe() and store > the information needed in the struct amba_device. > > Kind regards > Uffe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html