On 1/23/24 3:58 PM, Claudiu wrote:
> From: Claudiu Beznea <[email protected]>
>
> Reference clock could be or not part of the power domain. If it is part of
Could be or not be, perhaps?
> the power domain, the power domain takes care of propertly setting it. In
Properly. :-)
> case it is not part of the power domain and full runtime PM support is
> available in driver the clock will not be propertly disabled/enabled at
> runtime. For this, keep the prepare/unprepare operations in the driver's
> probe()/remove() functions and move the enable/disable in runtime PM
> functions.
>
> Along with it, the other clock request operations were moved close to
> reference clock request and prepare to have all the clock requests
> specific code grouped together.
>
> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <[email protected]>
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
> index 9fc0e39e33c2..4673cc2faec0 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
[...]
> @@ -3060,21 +3058,27 @@ static int ravb_resume(struct device *dev)
> return ret;
> }
>
> -static int ravb_runtime_nop(struct device *dev)
> +static int ravb_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
> {
> - /* Runtime PM callback shared between ->runtime_suspend()
> - * and ->runtime_resume(). Simply returns success.
> - *
> - * This driver re-initializes all registers after
> - * pm_runtime_get_sync() anyway so there is no need
> - * to save and restore registers here.
> - */
I want to pull out the dummy {ravb|sh_eth}_runtime_nop() funcs --
they don't seem to be necessary... Then we can implement your clock
dance with freshly added ravb_runtime_{suspend|resume}()...
[...]
MBR, Sergey
On 23.01.2024 22:43, Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> On 1/23/24 3:58 PM, Claudiu wrote:
>
>> From: Claudiu Beznea <[email protected]>
>>
>> Reference clock could be or not part of the power domain. If it is part of
>
> Could be or not be, perhaps?
>
>> the power domain, the power domain takes care of propertly setting it. In
>
> Properly. :-)
>
>> case it is not part of the power domain and full runtime PM support is
>> available in driver the clock will not be propertly disabled/enabled at
>> runtime. For this, keep the prepare/unprepare operations in the driver's
>> probe()/remove() functions and move the enable/disable in runtime PM
>> functions.
>>
>> Along with it, the other clock request operations were moved close to
>> reference clock request and prepare to have all the clock requests
>> specific code grouped together.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <[email protected]>
> [...]
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>> index 9fc0e39e33c2..4673cc2faec0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
> [...]
>> @@ -3060,21 +3058,27 @@ static int ravb_resume(struct device *dev)
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> -static int ravb_runtime_nop(struct device *dev)
>> +static int ravb_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
>> {
>> - /* Runtime PM callback shared between ->runtime_suspend()
>> - * and ->runtime_resume(). Simply returns success.
>> - *
>> - * This driver re-initializes all registers after
>> - * pm_runtime_get_sync() anyway so there is no need
>> - * to save and restore registers here.
>> - */
>
> I want to pull out the dummy {ravb|sh_eth}_runtime_nop() funcs --
> they don't seem to be necessary... Then we can implement your clock
> dance with freshly added ravb_runtime_{suspend|resume}()...
For this series, does it worth having a patch that removes ravb runtime
suspend/resume ops to then add a new patch that add it it again?
I can do it but it I see no reason in doing it in this series...
The dummy functions were there and the commit description explains the
reason they were updated.
Thank you,
Claudiu Beznea
>
> [...]
>
> MBR, Sergey
On 1/29/24 4:53 PM, claudiu beznea wrote:
[...]
>>> From: Claudiu Beznea <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Reference clock could be or not part of the power domain. If it is part of
>>
>> Could be or not be, perhaps?
>>
>>> the power domain, the power domain takes care of propertly setting it. In
>>
>> Properly. :-)
>>
>>> case it is not part of the power domain and full runtime PM support is
>>> available in driver the clock will not be propertly disabled/enabled at
>>> runtime. For this, keep the prepare/unprepare operations in the driver's
>>> probe()/remove() functions and move the enable/disable in runtime PM
>>> functions.
>>>
>>> Along with it, the other clock request operations were moved close to
>>> reference clock request and prepare to have all the clock requests
>>> specific code grouped together.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <[email protected]>
>> [...]
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>> index 9fc0e39e33c2..4673cc2faec0 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>> [...]
>>> @@ -3060,21 +3058,27 @@ static int ravb_resume(struct device *dev)
>>> return ret;
>>> }
>>>
>>> -static int ravb_runtime_nop(struct device *dev)
>>> +static int ravb_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>> {
>>> - /* Runtime PM callback shared between ->runtime_suspend()
>>> - * and ->runtime_resume(). Simply returns success.
>>> - *
>>> - * This driver re-initializes all registers after
>>> - * pm_runtime_get_sync() anyway so there is no need
>>> - * to save and restore registers here.
>>> - */
>>
>> I want to pull out the dummy {ravb|sh_eth}_runtime_nop() funcs --
>> they don't seem to be necessary... Then we can implement your clock
The need to have the dummy RPM suspend/resume methods is gone since:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=63d00be69348fda431ae59aba6af268a5cf5058e
>> dance with freshly added ravb_runtime_{suspend|resume}()...
>
> For this series, does it worth having a patch that removes ravb runtime
> suspend/resume ops to then add a new patch that add it it again?
Probably not, indeed... I just wanted to have 2 symmetric patches
for sh_eth and ravb removing the dummy methods...
> I can do it but it I see no reason in doing it in this series...
>
> The dummy functions were there and the commit description explains the
> reason they were updated.
Yet you don't say a word about the big comment in ravb_runtime_nop()
that you remove. This comment doesn't really make much sense as this
driver currently has the RPM calls and ndo_{open|stop}() methods decoupled...
This stuff was copied from sh_eth.c verbatim -- I clearly overlooked it when
prepping this driver for upstream... :-<
You can keep this patch as is (but not its description!) or have a separate
patch that removes just the big comment not making much sense, both options
would be fine by me. I will take care of sh_eth.c myself (not really sure
whether you have targets having this IP)...
> Thank you,
> Claudiu Beznea
MBR, Sergey