MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0hFP4zP+Q1znQ9ZnUTLunNaStmSR4-h-AqKn6UaF-d9Vw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7742130.AaJQIxeI1n@aspire.rjw.lan> <252167445.OQUXi2Ca9Y@aspire.rjw.lan>
 <CAPDyKFpC0xLfGLqyWUZwnSVdeY9Ojs-JUtPzEkRr=KAuSXDfmQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAJZ5v0hFP4zP+Q1znQ9ZnUTLunNaStmSR4-h-AqKn6UaF-d9Vw@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 12:19:20 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0h97zsjG=xKHz=zjaQiLz-ER5YfsQz=c3k7ZFafG8H8Cg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] PM / core: Direct DPM_FLAG_SMART_SUSPEND optimization
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 920
Lines: 24

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 10 December 2017 at 01:00, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>>

[cut]

>
>> Moreover, what happens when/if a driver that has deployed this
>> solution, starts being used on a new SoC and then additional
>> operations during system suspend becomes required (for example
>> pinctrls that needs to be put in a system sleep state)? Then
>> everything falls apart, doesn't it?
>
> Then you runtime-resume the device in ->suspend() and the remaining
> callbacks will run for you just fine.

BTW, I guess you'll need a middle layer in that case anyway so that
the driver doesn't have to distinguish between platforms it has to
work with which makes the argument somewhat moot.

Thanks,
Rafael