On Mon, 2014-03-31 at 11:23AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 27 March 2014 16:25, Harini Katakam <harinik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: [...] > > +static int __maybe_unused zynq_gpio_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev) > > +{ > > + struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev); > > + struct zynq_gpio *gpio = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > > + > > + clk_disable(gpio->clk); > > You should be able can use clk_disable_unprepare() here. > > > + > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +static int __maybe_unused zynq_gpio_runtime_resume(struct device *dev) > > +{ > > + struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev); > > + struct zynq_gpio *gpio = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > > + > > + return clk_enable(gpio->clk); > > You should be able can use clk_prepare_enable() here. Is there some common practice regarding this? As I understand it, we want to ensure the clock to be gated during suspend, which should happen with clk_disable(). Why would we also unprepare the clock? We are highly likely to use it again once we resume. Thanks, Sören -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html