On 13/03/2019 10:40, Sameer Pujar wrote:
>
> On 3/13/2019 3:58 PM, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> On 13/03/2019 05:43, Sameer Pujar wrote:
>>> If the driver is active till late suspend, where runtime PM cannot run,
>>> force suspend is essential in such case to put the device in low power
>>> state. Thus pm_runtime_force_suspend and pm_runtime_force_resume are
>>> used as system sleep callbacks during system wide PM transitions.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sameer Pujar <spujar@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c | 10 ++--------
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c b/drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c
>>> index 650cd9c..be29171 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/dma/tegra210-adma.c
>>> @@ -796,17 +796,11 @@ static int tegra_adma_remove(struct
>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>>> -static int tegra_adma_pm_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>> -{
>>> - return pm_runtime_suspended(dev) == false;
>>> -}
>>> -#endif
>>> -
>>> static const struct dev_pm_ops tegra_adma_dev_pm_ops = {
>>> SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(tegra_adma_runtime_suspend,
>>> tegra_adma_runtime_resume, NULL)
>>> - SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(tegra_adma_pm_suspend, NULL)
>>> + SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pm_runtime_force_suspend,
>>> + pm_runtime_force_resume)
>>> };
>> Looking at our downstream kernel we use LATE_SYSTEM_SLEEP for these. Any
>> reason why you changed this?
> I think, I just wanted to replace function calls for system sleep here
> and probably did
> not see exactly what we have in downstream kernel at that point. Looking
> at the commit
> log in downstream, it might qualify for separate patch.
> Let me know if you think, its better to add here.
I see no reason to change this from what we have been using and testing
downstream. I don't think that this warrants yet another patch for this.
Furthermore, the changelog references 'late' so it does not seem to
align with the change itself.
Cheers
Jon
--
nvpublic
