On 2019-09-12 19:05:47 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 04:16:56PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 at 12:46, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > During probe, tmio variant drivers calls pm_runtime_enable() before they
> > > call tmio_mmc_host_probe(). This doesn't work as expected, because
> > > tmio_mmc_host_probe() calls pm_runtime_set_active(), which fails to set the
> > > status to RPM_ACTIVE for the device, when its been enabled for runtime PM.
> > >
> > > Fix this by calling pm_runtime_enable() from tmio_mmc_host_probe() instead.
> > > To avoid the device from being runtime suspended during the probe phase,
> > > let's also increase the runtime PM usage count in tmio_mmc_host_probe().
> > > Consequentially, each tmio variant driver can decide themselves when to
> > > call pm_runtime_put(), to allow the device to become runtime suspended.
> > >
> > > Additionally, if the tmio variant driver decided to call pm_runtime_put()
> > > during probe, it's is expected that it also calls pm_runtime_get_sync() to
> > > restore the usage count, before it calls tmio_mmc_host_remove().
> > >
> > > Fixes: 7ff213193310 ("mmc: tmio: move runtime PM enablement to the driver implementations")
> > > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > So I decided to apply this for my fixes branch, as to get it tested
> > for a few days.
> >
> > If you have any objections, please tell.
>
> Sadly, I can't test until next week because I am still on the road. Yet,
> I recall Niklas said at LPC that the patch looks good to him, at least.
>
Yes I think it looks good and was planing to test it. Unfortunately I'm
also on the road until the end of next week ;-(
--
Regards,
Niklas Söderlund
