On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:31:20AM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 09:30:29AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > How is this happening? I think that needs proper investigation - or if > > it's had more investigation, then the results needs to be included in > > the commit description so that everyone can understand the issue here. > > > > We should not be resuming a device which hasn't been suspended. Maybe > > the runtime PM enable sequence is wrong, and that's what should be fixed > > instead? > > > > This sequence in the probe() function: > > > > pm_runtime_irq_safe(&pdev->dev); > > pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev); > > pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev); > > > > would enable runtime PM while the s/w state indicates that it's disabled, > > and then that pm_runtime_get_sync() will want to resume the device. See > > the section "5. Runtime PM Initialization, Device Probing and Removal" > > in Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt, specifically the second paragraph > > of that section. > > that was tested. It worked in pandaboard but didn't work on beagleboard > XM. Sourav tried to start a discussion about that, but it simply died... > > In any case, pm_runtime_get_sync() in probe will always call > runtime_resume callback, right ? Well, if the runtime PM state says it's suspended, and then you enable runtime PM, the first call to pm_runtime_get_sync() will trigger a resume attempt. The patch description is complaining about resume events without there being a preceding suspend event. This could well be why. -- 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
