On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Lukas Wunner <lukas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Dear Rafael, > > The honor of your presence is requested to the review of this series > posted May 13. > > Bjorn has requested an ack from you on patches 9 and 10, so the series > is essentially blocked until you find the time to comment. It would > also be good if you could look at the PM-related patches 4, 5, 6 and 11. > They're all fairly small. You do not have to bother about the larger > thunderbolt patches at the end of the series: Sorry for being the bottleneck here. This has been in my todo list all the time, but I get pulled away from it on a regular basis due to regressions and similar. > [01/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090411/ > [02/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090421/ > [03/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090451/ > [04/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090471/ > [05/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090491/ > [06/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090511/ > [07/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090531/ > [08/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090541/ > [09/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090621/ > [10/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090641/ > [11/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090651/ > [12/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090571/ > [13/13] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9090591/ > > There are also still unanswered questions about the architecture > I've chosen in this series: I'm attaching to the upstream bridge > of the Thunderbolt controller as a port service to be able to > power it down when nothing is plugged in. This architecture is > a workaround for the fact that dev_pm_domain_set() cannot be > called after a device is bound to a driver. > > I've explained this in detail in an e-mail to you on June 17: > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg52120.html I've read this, but I still don't quite understand the problem to be honest. I'll have another look. > Near the end of that e-mail are two questions: > (1) Would it be possible to allow dev_pm_domain_set() for already > bound devices? (It would allow me to simplify this series > considerably.) I don't think so, because setting a PM domain generally changes the set of PM callbacks for the device and it may not be safe to call it after the driver has been bound. > (2) How should the PCI core deal with devices that can be suspended > to D3cold but not by the platform? Is it correct to solve this > with dev_pm_domain_set()? (As is currently done for Optimus GPUs.) > Is it also okay to suspend/resume them in the driver runtime PM > callbacks? (This requires patch [09/13] of my series to work > properly.) > > Your help answering those questions and/or reviewing this series > is greatly appreciated. > > Thank you! Well, honestly, you may be underestimating the amount of time needed for me to understand the problem you're trying to solve. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
