Hi Harigovindan
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 04:04:38PM +0530, Harigovindan P wrote:
> ti-sn65dsi86 bridge is enumerated as a runtime device.
>
> Adding sleep ops to force runtime_suspend when PM suspend is
> requested on the device.
Patch looks correct - but could you please explain why it is needed.
What is the gain compared to not having this patch.
I ask for two reasons:
1) I really do not know
2) this info should be in the changelog
Without a better changelog no ack from me - sorry.
Sam
>
> Signed-off-by: Harigovindan P <harigovi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Include bridge name in the commit message and
> remove dependent patchwork link from the commit
> text as bridge is independent of OEM(Stephen Boyd)
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> index 6ad688b320ae..2eef755b2917 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> @@ -159,6 +159,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused ti_sn_bridge_suspend(struct device *dev)
>
> static const struct dev_pm_ops ti_sn_bridge_pm_ops = {
> SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(ti_sn_bridge_suspend, ti_sn_bridge_resume, NULL)
> + SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pm_runtime_force_suspend,
> + pm_runtime_force_resume)
> };
>
> static int status_show(struct seq_file *s, void *data)
> --
> 2.27.0
