On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 12:58:31PM +0200, Niklas Söderlund wrote:
> On 2024-05-08 02:55:44 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > +static int rtsn_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> >
> >
> > > + pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
> > > + pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev);
> >
> >
> > > +static int rtsn_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct rtsn_private *priv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > > +
> > > + unregister_netdev(priv->ndev);
> > > + rtsn_mdio_free(priv);
> > > + rcar_gen4_ptp_unregister(priv->ptp_priv);
> > > + rtsn_change_mode(priv, OCR_OPC_DISABLE);
> > > + netif_napi_del(&priv->napi);
> > > +
> > > + pm_runtime_put_sync(&pdev->dev);
> > > + pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
> >
> > These appear to be the only two places you do any pm_ stuff. So it
> > seems pointless. Maybe delete this for the moment, and come back later
> > to add proper runtime power management?
>
> I agree enable more PM stuff is a good candidate to follow initial
> entablement. But these pm_ calls are not pointless, I still need to deal
> with power. If I remove the pm_ calls things starts to fail.
That is odd. Why does it fail? What is turning the power off? Did i
miss you registering some callbacks?
Andrew
