On Tue, 2 Feb 2016, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > Also, what is autosuspend_delay set to for your device? And is > > runtime_auto set? > > It's 100 at that point, see the commented snippet below from > omap_hsmmc_probe(): > > pm_runtime_enable(host->dev); > pm_runtime_get_sync(host->dev); > pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(host->dev, MMC_AUTOSUSPEND_DELAY); > /* NOTE: pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend(host->dev) needed here? */ > pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(host->dev); > ... > /* gets -EPROBE_DEFER */ > err_irq: > ... > pm_runtime_put_sync(host->dev); You could try changing this to pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend(). But putting pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() before the put_sync seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to do, especially if you feel you should reverse all the changes you made at the start. > pm_runtime_disable(host->dev); > /* NOTE: suspend callback never gets called unless > * pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() is called > * before pm_runtime_put_sync() above. > */ > ... > > > > > Does pm_runtime_use_autosuspend() get called by the probe routine? If > > > > it does, then perhaps you can get what you want by having the probe > > > > routine call pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() whenever it's about to > > > > return an error -- particularly -EDEFER. > > > > > > Yes so far that's the only fix that seems to work like I posted > > > earlier. But is that the right fix though? > > > > No, not really. Ideally you would leave autosuspend turned on. The > > delay would be long enough to that after -EDEFER, another probe would > > start before the delay expired. But shortly after the last probe > > attempt, the delay would expire and the device would then be put in low > > power. > > But then what about the new reinit function? To me it seems that > we should not attempt to maintain a state from the earlier failed > probe. Or are you thinking we just skip the reinit if autosuspend > is set? The reinit function gets called too late to do what you want -- namely, put the hardware in a low-power state. That _is_ what you want, isn't it? The alternative is to leave dev->power.rpm_status set to RPM_ACTIVE, to match the hardware's actual state. Given that the reinit function is supposed to restore the initial settings, it probably ought to call pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend(). But that won't be enough to fix your problem. > > > If we wanted to have some generic fix, it seems we would have to pass > > > a new flag in pm_runtime_put_sync() to ignore any autosuspend > > > configuration. But I don't know if that's what we want to or should > > > do though? > > > > I don't think so. > > So should we just establish a policy that pm_runtime_use_autosuspend() > needs to be paired with pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() for > pm_runtime_put_sync() to work? Your understanding is slightly wrong. pm_runtime_put_sync() _does_ work -- that is, it does what it's supposed to do. The difficulty is that what it's supposed to do doesn't match what you think. pm_runtime_put_sync() is supposed to follow the driver's wishes. It invokes the driver's runtime_idle callback if there is one, and the callback routine can start a suspend or an autosuspend. If there is no callback, it will use whatever autosuspend setting the driver has set up. If you want to override the autosuspend setting, use pm_runtime_put_sync_suspend() instead. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
