On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 10:43:22PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 9, 2017 3:28:22 PM CEST Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > The commit 8503ff166504 ("i2c: designware: Avoid unnecessary resuming
> > during system suspend"), may suggest to the PM core to try out the so
> > called direct_complete path for system sleep. In this path, the PM core
> > treats a runtime suspended device as it's already in a proper low power
> > state for system sleep, which makes it skip calling the system sleep
> > callbacks for the device, except for the ->prepare() and the ->complete()
> > callbacks.
> >
> > However, the PM core may unset the direct_complete flag for a parent
> > device, in case its child device are being system suspended before. In this
> > scenario, the PM core invokes the system sleep callbacks, no matter if the
> > device is runtime suspended or not.
> >
> > Particularly in cases of an existing i2c slave device, the above path is
> > triggered, which breaks the assumption that the i2c device is always
> > runtime resumed whenever the dw_i2c_plat_suspend() is being called.
> >
> > More precisely, dw_i2c_plat_suspend() calls clk_core_disable() and
> > clk_core_unprepare(), for an already disabled/unprepared clock, leading to
> > a splat in the log about clocks calls being wrongly balanced and breaking
> > system sleep.
> >
> > To still allow the direct_complete path in cases when it's possible, but
> > also to keep the fix simple, let's runtime resume the i2c device in the
> > ->suspend() callback, before continuing to put the device into low power
> > state.
> >
> > Note, in cases when the i2c device is attached to the ACPI PM domain, this
> > problem doesn't occur, because ACPI's ->suspend() callback, assigned to
> > acpi_subsys_suspend(), already calls pm_runtime_resume() for the device.
> >
> > It should also be noted that this change does not fix commit 8503ff166504
> > ("i2c: designware: Avoid unnecessary resuming during system suspend").
> > Because for the non-ACPI case, the system sleep support was already broken
> > prior that point.
> >
> > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # v4.4+
> > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Looks OK to me.
I read this as Acked-by. If so, using the real "Acked-by" tag would be
helpful because patchwork collects them automatically.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature