[...] >>> + pm_runtime_set_active(&pdev->dev); >>> + pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev); >>> + ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev); >>> + if (ret < 0) >>> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to pm_runtime_get_sync: %d\n", ret); >> >> As I stated earlier I think this is a strange behaviour of how to >> implement runtime PM support. Could you elaborate one more time why >> this actually is needed? > > Thanks for pointing out this. > We studied again and realized that this runtime PM support was only there for > powerdomain management, but we have not yet upstreamed the powerdomain > support. Thus we would like to remove it in next version. I am fine with you removing the runtime PM support in the next version. I also hope you to upstream the power domain support later on, that would be nice. A small note: >From a driver perspective, you shall be able to implement runtime PM support even if you haven't upstreamed the power domain support yet. But, let's then deal with that as a separate patch later on. Kind regards Uffe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
