On 6/23/21 12:35 AM, Can Guo wrote: > @@ -9141,6 +9143,8 @@ static int ufshcd_suspend(struct ufs_hba *hba) > > if (!hba->is_powered) > return 0; > + > + hba->pm_op_in_progress = true; > /* > * Disable the host irq as host controller as there won't be any > * host controller transaction expected till resume. > @@ -9160,6 +9164,7 @@ static int ufshcd_suspend(struct ufs_hba *hba) > ufshcd_vreg_set_lpm(hba); > /* Put the host controller in low power mode if possible */ > ufshcd_hba_vreg_set_lpm(hba); > + hba->pm_op_in_progress = false; > return ret; > } > > @@ -9179,6 +9184,7 @@ static int ufshcd_resume(struct ufs_hba *hba) > if (!hba->is_powered) > return 0; > > + hba->pm_op_in_progress = true; > ufshcd_hba_vreg_set_hpm(hba); > ret = ufshcd_vreg_set_hpm(hba); > if (ret) > @@ -9198,6 +9204,7 @@ static int ufshcd_resume(struct ufs_hba *hba) > out: > if (ret) > ufshcd_update_evt_hist(hba, UFS_EVT_RESUME_ERR, (u32)ret); > + hba->pm_op_in_progress = false; > return ret; > } Has it been considered to check dev->power.runtime_status instead of introducing the pm_op_in_progress variable? Thanks, Bart.
