Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 16 Jun 2020 08:30:42 -0700
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To:     Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
Cc:     Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>,
        linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, "Andrew F . Davis" <afd@ti.com>,
        Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@ti.com>,
        Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@ti.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
        Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>,
        Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>, Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>,
        Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] drm/omap: Fix suspend resume regression after
 platform data removal
Message-ID: <20200616153042.GZ37466@atomide.com>
References: <20200531193941.13179-1-tony@atomide.com>
 <20200531193941.13179-2-tony@atomide.com>
 <16ba1808-5c7f-573d-8dd0-c80cac2f476e@ti.com>
 <20200603140639.GG37466@atomide.com>
 <47e286dd-f87a-4440-5bde-1f7b53e8b672@ti.com>
 <20200609151943.GL37466@atomide.com>
 <9ed70121-2a53-d2b3-051a-88eb83e6c53f@ti.com>
 <d03dd04f-6f2c-25ba-fe1f-d5fc0dfb5c68@ti.com>
 <592501c9-2d94-b266-ae76-e383d3bffa29@ti.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <592501c9-2d94-b266-ae76-e383d3bffa29@ti.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

* Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> [200616 13:02]:
> On 11/06/2020 17:00, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> > I think, suspend might be fixed if all devices, which are now child of ti-sysc, will do
> > pm_runtime_force_xxx() calls at noirq suspend stage by adding:
> > 
> >      SET_NOIRQ_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pm_runtime_force_suspend,
> >                        pm_runtime_force_resume)
> > 
> > Am I missing smth?
> 
> Isn't this almost exactly the same my patch does? I just used suspend_late
> and resume_early. Is noirq phase better than late & early?

Well up to you as far as I'm concerned. The noirq phase comes with serious
limitations, for let's say i2c bus usage if needed. Probably also harder
to debug for suspend and resume.

Regards,

Tony