Continuing on the theme of runtime PM interactions with other parts of
the driver core...
In drivers/base/dd.c:driver_probe_device(), the driver core increments
the usage count around ->probe():
[...]
pm_runtime_get_noresume(dev);
pm_runtime_barrier(dev);
ret = really_probe(dev, drv);
pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
I'm not following the reason for this. On driver's I'm familar with,
it's not until ->probe where pm_runtime_enable() is called. What is
being protected against here?
These seem to exist since the introduction of the runtime PM core, but I
can't find any explanation.
The documentation refers to the increment by the core, but not the
reasons why:
If the device bus type's or driver's ->probe() or ->remove()
callback runs pm_runtime_suspend() or pm_runtime_idle() or their
asynchronous counterparts, they will fail returning -EAGAIN, because
the device's usage counter is incremented by the core before
executing ->probe() and ->remove(). Still, it may be desirable to
suspend the device as soon as ->probe() or ->remove() has finished,
so the PM core uses pm_runtime_idle_sync() to invoke the
subsystem-level idle callback for the device at that time.
On a side note, the bit about -EAGAIN above is not accurate with today's
code. For example, __pm_runtime_suspend() returns zero when the usage
count decrement is non-zero, so callers can't currently know that doing
a pm_runtime_suspend() or pm_runtime_put_sync() in their ->probe()
actually didn't happen.
Another curiosity is that, contrary to the above documentation, there is
no usage_count increment before the bus/driver ->remove() (although
there is a _get_sync/_put_sync around the sysfs_remove and notifier just
before the bus/driver->remove().
Also, below is a patch for a typo in the above Documentation exerpt.
Kevin
>From 069484f8d2bb86473a271c27733e10fbfd410c2c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:07:31 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] PM: Documentation: fix typo: pm_runtime_idle_sync() doesn't exist.
Replace reference to pm_runtime_idle_sync() in the driver core with
pm_runtime_put_sync() which is used in the code.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxx>
---
Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt b/Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt
index 22accb3..518d9be 100644
--- a/Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt
+++ b/Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt
@@ -506,7 +506,7 @@ pm_runtime_suspend() or pm_runtime_idle() or their asynchronous counterparts,
they will fail returning -EAGAIN, because the device's usage counter is
incremented by the core before executing ->probe() and ->remove(). Still, it
may be desirable to suspend the device as soon as ->probe() or ->remove() has
-finished, so the PM core uses pm_runtime_idle_sync() to invoke the
+finished, so the PM core uses pm_runtime_put_sync() to invoke the
subsystem-level idle callback for the device at that time.
The user space can effectively disallow the driver of the device to power manage
--
1.7.4
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
