On 28 June 2017 at 16:51, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wednesday, June 28, 2017 04:01:39 PM Ulf Hansson wrote: >> On 27 June 2017 at 09:55, Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On 06/22/2017 02:16 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote: >> >> >> >> On 06/22/2017 01:49 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote: >> >>> >> >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 01:31:51AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Thanks Ulf for taking care of this! >> >>> >> >> Indeed! >> >> >> >>> I tested this series on Dell XPS 9350 which has touch panel connected to >> >>> I2C and suspend/resume still works fine and I can see the controller >> >>> going to D3 when the touch panel is idle. >> >>> >> >>> I can perform more comprehensive testing next week. >> >>> >> >> Unfortunately I'm seeing interrupt storm during suspend/resume on >> >> platform using PM domain from drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c straight after >> >> this patch. Maybe some timing related as I see it only if I have debug >> >> messages on (i2c_designware_core.dyndbg=+p). But it occurs only after >> >> this patch. >> >> >> > Sorry the noise, this was bogus. That platform is doing this interrupt storm >> > randomly and it occurs also without the patch. >> >> >> Okay, then it seems like we should go with $subject patch, although >> allow me to update the changelog and post a new version. > > But as I said, it would be better to do the pm_runtime_resume() in ->resume > (unless that breaks something), for two reasons. > > The first reason is that ->complete is synchronous and ->resume can be done > in parallel with other devices which potentially saves time. The second reason > is that it wouldn't interfere with direct_complete on systems where that > actually works. Yes, that's good points - and I don't see any obvious reasons to why it shouldn't work. Kind regards Uffe
