On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 06:30:43PM +0800, Zhenhua Huang wrote:
> TBU driver has no runtime pm support now, adding pm_runtime_enable()
> seems to be useless. Remove it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Huang <quic_zhenhuah@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c | 6 ------
> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> index 36c6b36ad4ff..aff2fe1fda13 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/arm-smmu-qcom.c
> @@ -566,7 +566,6 @@ static struct acpi_platform_list qcom_acpi_platlist[] = {
>
> static int qcom_smmu_tbu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> - struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> int ret;
>
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM_SMMU_QCOM_DEBUG)) {
> @@ -575,11 +574,6 @@ static int qcom_smmu_tbu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return ret;
> }
>
> - if (dev->pm_domain) {
> - pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> - pm_runtime_enable(dev);
I assumed that this was required to avoid the TBU from being powered
down? If so, then I think we shall move it under the
previous if condition, i.e. CONFIG_ARM_SMMU_QCOM_DEBUG?
If not, we can remove it give that the TBU would be powered ON as needed
> - }
> -
> return 0;
> }
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
>
Thanks,
Pranjal
