On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 7:11 AM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > >>> > +++ linux-pm/include/linux/pm.h >>> > @@ -559,6 +559,7 @@ struct pm_subsys_data { >>> > * NEVER_SKIP: Do not skip system suspend/resume callbacks for the device. >>> > * SMART_PREPARE: Check the return value of the driver's ->prepare callback. >>> > * SMART_SUSPEND: No need to resume the device from runtime suspend. >>> > + * LEAVE_SUSPENDED: Avoid resuming the device during system resume if possible. >>> > * >>> > * Setting SMART_PREPARE instructs bus types and PM domains which may want >>> > * system suspend/resume callbacks to be skipped for the device to return 0 from >>> > @@ -572,10 +573,14 @@ struct pm_subsys_data { >>> > * necessary from the driver's perspective. It also may cause them to skip >>> > * invocations of the ->suspend_late and ->suspend_noirq callbacks provided by >>> > * the driver if they decide to leave the device in runtime suspend. >>> > + * >>> > + * Setting LEAVE_SUSPENDED informs the PM core and middle-layer code that the >>> > + * driver prefers the device to be left in runtime suspend after system resume. >>> > */ >>> >>> Question: Can LEAVE_SUSPENDED and NEVER_SKIP be valid combination? I >>> guess not!? Should we validate for wrong combinations? >> >> Why not? There's no real overlap between them. > > Except that NEVER_SKIP, documentation wise, tells you that your > suspend and resume callbacks will never be skipped. :-) You mean the comment in pm.h I suppose? Yes, it isn't precise enough. The proper documentation in devices.rst is less ambiguous, though. :-) > [...] > >>> Second, have you considered setting the default value of >>> dev->power.may_skip_resume to true? >> >> Yes. >> >>> That would means the subsystem >>> instead need to implement an opt-out method. I am thinking that it may >>> not be an issue, since we anyway at this point, don't have drivers >>> using the LEAVE_SUSPENDED flag. >> >> Opt-out doesn't work because of the need to invoke the "noirq" callbacks. > > I am not sure I follow that. > > Whatever needs to be fixed on the subsystem level, that could be done > before the driver starts using the LEAVE_SUSPENDED flag. No? That requires a bit of explanation, sorry for being overly concise. The core calls ->resume_noirq from the middle layer regardless of whether or not the device will be left suspended, so the ->resume_noirq cannot do arbitrary things to it. Setting may_skip_resume by the middle layer tells the core that the middle layer is ready for that and is going to cooperate. If may_skip_resume had been set by default, that piece of information would have been missing. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html