On 10/29/2015 03:57 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
there's no need to call pm_runtime_get_sync()
followed by pm_runtime_put(). We should, instead,
just call pm_runtime_put_sync() and pm_runtime_disable().
Sry, but why do we need to call pm_runtime_put[_sync]() here?
My be just pm_runtime_disable() will be ok?
Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx>
---
drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c | 11 +----------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c
index 69c1a95b0615..64318fcfacf2 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c
@@ -554,16 +554,7 @@ free_master:
static int ti_qspi_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
- struct ti_qspi *qspi = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
- int ret;
-
- ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(qspi->dev);
- if (ret < 0) {
- dev_err(qspi->dev, "pm_runtime_get_sync() failed\n");
- return ret;
- }
-
- pm_runtime_put(qspi->dev);
+ pm_runtime_put_sync(&pdev->dev);
pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
return 0;
--
regards,
-grygorii
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
