On 7/2/21 8:07 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 7/2/21 11:23 AM, Raphael Gallais-Pou wrote: >> Hello Marek, > > Hi, > >> Sorry for the late answer. > > No worries, take your time > >> On 6/30/21 2:35 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> On 6/29/21 1:58 PM, Raphael GALLAIS-POU - foss wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/stm/ltdc.c >>>> @@ -425,10 +425,17 @@ static void ltdc_crtc_atomic_enable(struct drm_crtc *crtc, >>>> { >>>> struct ltdc_device *ldev = crtc_to_ltdc(crtc); >>>> struct drm_device *ddev = crtc->dev; >>>> + int ret; >>>> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("\n"); >>>> - pm_runtime_get_sync(ddev->dev); >>>> + if (!pm_runtime_active(ddev->dev)) { >>>> + ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(ddev->dev); >>> >>> All these if (!pm_runtime_active()) then pm_runtime_get_sync() calls look like workaround for some larger issue. Shouldn't the pm_runtime do some refcounting on its own , so this shouldn't be needed ? >> >> >> This problem purely comes from the driver internals, so I don't think it is a workaround. >> >> Because of the "ltdc_crtc_mode_set_nofb" function which does not have any "symmetrical" call, such as enable/disable functions, there was two calls to pm_runtime_get_sync against one call to pm_runtime_put_sync. >> >> This instability resulted in the LTDC clocks being always enabled, even when the peripheral was disabled. This could be seen in the clk_summary as explained in the patch summary among other things. >> >> By doing so, we first check if the clocks are not already activated, and in that case we call pm_runtime_get_sync. > > I just have to wonder, how come other drivers don't need these if (!pm_runtime_active()) pm_runtime_get_sync() conditions. I think they just get/put the runtime PM within a call itself, not across function calls. Maybe that could be the right fix here too ? Hello Marek, I've run a deeper analysis over this implementation. If I may take rockchip's "rockchip_drm_vop.c" driver, there is an boolean "is_enabled" set to true when crtc_atomic_enable is called. The above implementation could save us from adding such field in the ltdc_dev structure. Another solution could be in order to simply call pm_runtime_get_sync() in ltdc_crtc_mode_set_nofb() and by removing this condition in ltdc_atomic_crtc_disable() the driver behaves just like the first version of this patch. In this way, it avoids such conditions and seems more to get along with the current implementation. Regards, Raphaël