On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > (fix your mailer dude) Sorry some settings got screwed up with my mailer > > On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 03:26:52PM +0530, Raja, Govindraj wrote: [..] >> this hunk is unnecessary. Clocks are always on when they are called. >> >> The problem is: >> [1]: >> runtime_put -> *power.lock* - > rpm->suspend -> above pr_debug -> >> console_write -> get_sync >> -> *power.lock* -> rpm resume >> power.lock contention. > > Are you sure ? If the device is still on, won't that get_sync() only > increase the pm counter ? Instead of going through everything ?? Oh > well, this is becoming quite racy :-( Yes true, but before it increments the counter it will take power.lock if we look into internals. pm_runtime_get_sync -> *__pm_runtime_resume* --> rpm_resume int __pm_runtime_resume(struct device *dev, int rpmflags) { [..] spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->power.lock, flags); retval = rpm_resume(dev, rpmflags); spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->power.lock, flags); [..] } Same applicable for runtime_put [..] >> I'll leave this to Kevin to decide what to do, but clocks are off >> here... >> >> Yes fine.� >> Since most of these prints will be printed if DEBUG macro >> is defined in respective files and *debug* is used in command line. >> Can't leave uart clocks active always on debug cases. >> [If *debug* �used as command line] >> and gate uart clocks only for non debug cases. >> With this approach�at least�we can have a clean solution >> in uart driver also without adding clock gating from idle path. >> Not sure if this�agreeable. >> As of now gating from idle path seems to be only clean approach. > > I see.. that could be one way... let's see how Kevin feels about it > though. > OK. -- Thanks, Govindraj.R -- 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