Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752852AbaJVPJl (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 11:09:41 -0400 Received: from mail-lb0-f175.google.com ([209.85.217.175]:53669 "EHLO mail-lb0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751755AbaJVPJj (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 11:09:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1413809764-21995-1-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> <1413809764-21995-3-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> <5446A065.9050308@gmail.com> <544793B5.6080601@ti.com> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 17:09:36 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: cYkKrLyVgjaBOlbJ62q1xSc2GwQ Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] ARM: keystone: pm: switch to use generic pm domains From: Geert Uytterhoeven To: Ulf Hansson Cc: Grygorii Strashko , Santosh Shilimkar , ssantosh@kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Kevin Hilman , Geert Uytterhoeven , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Rob Herring , Grant Likely , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Ulf, On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>>> +void keystone_pm_domain_attach_dev(struct device *dev) >>>> { >>>> + struct clk *clk; >>>> int ret; >>>> + int i = 0; >>>> >>>> dev_dbg(dev, "%s\n", __func__); >>>> >>>> - ret = pm_generic_runtime_suspend(dev); >>>> - if (ret) >>>> - return ret; >>>> - >>>> - ret = pm_clk_suspend(dev); >>>> + ret = pm_clk_create(dev); >>>> if (ret) { >>>> - pm_generic_runtime_resume(dev); >>>> - return ret; >>>> + dev_err(dev, "pm_clk_create failed %d\n", ret); >>>> + return; >>>> + }; >>>> + >>>> + while ((clk = of_clk_get(dev->of_node, i++)) && !IS_ERR(clk)) { >>>> + ret = pm_clk_add_clk(dev, clk); >>>> + if (ret) { >>>> + dev_err(dev, "pm_clk_add_clk failed %d\n", ret); >>>> + goto clk_err; >>>> + }; >>>> } >>>> >>>> - return 0; >>>> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME)) { >>> Can we not okkup two seperate callbacks instead of above check ? >>> I don't like this CONFIG check here. Its slightly better version of >>> ifdef in middle of the code. >> >> I've found more-less similar comment on patch >> "Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] power-domain: add power domain drivers for Rockchip platform" >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/17/257 >> >> So, Would you like me to create patch which will enable clocks in pm_clk_add/_clk() >> in case !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME) > > I am wondering whether we actually should/could do this, no matter of > CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME. > > Typically, for configurations that uses CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME, the PM > clocks through pm_clk_suspend(), will be gated once the device becomes > runtime PM suspended. Right? Doing it unconditionally means we'll have lots of unneeded clocks running for a short while. Are you trying to repeat power-up-all-PM-domains-during-boot for clocks, too? ;-) Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/