Hi Kevin, (CC'ing Ulf) Thank you for the review. On Thursday 03 March 2016 12:35:53 Kevin Hilman wrote: > Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > The pm_runtime_force_suspend() and pm_runtime_force_resume() helpers are > > designed to help driver being RPM-centric by offering an easy way to > > manager runtime PM state during system suspend and resume. The first > > s/manager/manage/ > > > function will force the device into runtime suspend at system suspend > > time, while the second one will perform the reverse operation at system > > resume time. > > > > However, the pm_runtime_force_resume() really forces resume, regarding > > s/regarding/regardless/ > > > of whether the device was running or already suspended before the call > > to pm_runtime_force_suspend(). This results in devices being runtime > > resumed at system resume time when they shouldn't. > > Agreed. > > > Fix this by recording whether the device has been forcefully suspended > > in pm_runtime_force_suspend() and condition resume in > > pm_runtime_force_resume() to that state. > > > > All current users of pm_runtime_force_resume() call the function > > uncontionally in their system resume handler (some actually set it as > > the resume handler), all after calling pm_runtime_force_suspend() at > > system suspend time. The change in behaviour should thus be safe. > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart > > <laurent.pinchart+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I agree this is the right approach, but Ulf should ack this too since > he's looked into all the strange corner case involved and may know of > something I've missed. Sure, the more reviewers, the merrier :-) -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
