On 2024/8/12 21:25, Pranjal Shrivastava wrote:
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
Hi Pranjal,
In my sense, this was giving the TBU ability to power down when
necessary(through pm callbacks)? While I haven't seen any RPM impl for
TBU device.. hence having the doubt..
Thanks,
Zhenhua
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
