"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx> writes: [...] >> >> However, based on the pm_runtime_set_active() problem you mentioned >> above, I'm not sure this will help either, since what the PM domain's >> noirq callback will want to do will be based on the actual device >> hardware state, not on the PM core's view of the device state. > > Yes. For devices whose runtime PM is never enabled, this is quite clear > (we must assume they are operational). For devices whose runtime PM is > temporarily disabled and the reenabled, it's not that clear, but at > least for the system suspend case we may require drivers not to use > pm_runtime_set_active/suspended() in their callbacks, so that we may > assume that the status hasn't changed between .suspend() and .resume(). > > So, I think your approach (to check power.runtime_status) is correct in this > respect. OK, I'll just directly check power.runtime_status in the noirq methods, since at that point I always know that disable_depth > 0. Kevin _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
