Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:9848:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x8csp1469861pxf; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 09:09:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwoQtBf/SS5ihpGbIQTpMGQbWk3f/JcvgpDJ9oSj1nLEArB7Ptdd4+U/7gLjJcHcqrsw/Te X-Received: by 2002:a63:6486:: with SMTP id y128mr14863681pgb.260.1617984566054; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 09:09:26 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1617984566; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Xh9l+nvc16q9jh3M/kh7Hvg9EuNMS2bMJJN8M0sjiYMitmDpomz8XfV3ekC6RwguOa ndOz0NVfnN18yXr1nraMvWkuMlcsxSnDmKaEKkbQaNQSOD45hETK15or0jOLk3Pa1u9m +0RvmhLE2lVQcEZpOGqfimjExGemsfmhYdp3NFdG8ol5d7mFAl771weHv0ALl1tPGYvI Uu/HZgLa3hAYzYeX4l616t9YtOzQBRmpr1+CBLtS4/8ej4pQBoK1LBfa7jWfT5nMLqZb rOFOU1b0QCzaTtZL/19aVFSuUBVTc+WrMFdYVXt6w10fVdIngUW9+5qy0LO460NcbMAu Bx7g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=Np0R8jz8X4f7v3vdRWj+57iPcgTXHXb9XIYeOfW1UjU=; b=zbWCIjG6wan3tB9tGoRT0DA4tMMcBodyK3maYJl+3K3zFK+PpwzbgzUYon1pPhcoOv xIZEgtny7ah0XiJ4zTvZdrpod/jKNVAImN5VHkZBwNyKwFhDnv9Y39vbuTLq6S9iGegU Mo8f3HvlqD1UsYu4H2G8lbOJZc0H8WgPvtkGYxBquLqQyWE1MiPV864SIW460up+BvLT iB6EFiyaeT9foEGzBZpst8UUfll9nWAg5u9YRHvKNCpUP3cgQWVp3LnG/6CoS7zWnxkp /21ZOPRVie1wmpLEHArBjE/1FPV7p7xlJkcECrwAWG6d/xpipCmFTX3RuMQ17B3BlT8T zpVw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@pqgruber.com header.s=mail header.b=BVZ9FKGY; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=pqgruber.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p2si2664379plf.308.2021.04.09.09.09.13; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 09:09:26 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@pqgruber.com header.s=mail header.b=BVZ9FKGY; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=pqgruber.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233917AbhDIQI1 (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:08:27 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50140 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233657AbhDIQI0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:08:26 -0400 Received: from mail.pqgruber.com (mail.pqgruber.com [IPv6:2a05:d014:575:f70b:4f2c:8f1d:40c4:b13e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF5B9C061761; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 09:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from workstation.tuxnet (213-47-165-233.cable.dynamic.surfer.at [213.47.165.233]) by mail.pqgruber.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 35805C725C8; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 18:08:12 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pqgruber.com; s=mail; t=1617984492; bh=Np0R8jz8X4f7v3vdRWj+57iPcgTXHXb9XIYeOfW1UjU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=BVZ9FKGYwtfh+ksPg4LV9T5cfz/S7UWpckmigqBJUkQ++69eYSiEdVfd6NDGrQC1G LKm+7ywk4nXYWJH2ncU5dth8JOXifkKfFBNZ8FnlqCjrRm5hrCdJpaZk6JL1kA3KI1 bKVi50TYuyy6nI4j+lkYZ15TzPyAi80Rum4Y651I= Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2021 18:08:10 +0200 From: Clemens Gruber To: Thierry Reding Cc: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, Sven Van Asbroeck , Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/8] pwm: pca9685: Improve runtime PM behavior Message-ID: References: <20210406164140.81423-1-clemens.gruber@pqgruber.com> <20210406164140.81423-3-clemens.gruber@pqgruber.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 03:03:20PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 06:41:35PM +0200, Clemens Gruber wrote: > > The chip does not come out of POR in active state but in sleep state. > > To be sure (in case the bootloader woke it up) we force it to sleep in > > probe. > > > > On kernels without CONFIG_PM, we wake the chip in .probe and put it to > > sleep in .remove. > > > > Signed-off-by: Clemens Gruber > > --- > > Changes since v6: > > - Improved !CONFIG_PM handling (wake it up without putting it to sleep > > first) > > > > drivers/pwm/pwm-pca9685.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-pca9685.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-pca9685.c > > index d4474c5ff96f..0bcec04b138a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-pca9685.c > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-pca9685.c > > @@ -474,13 +474,18 @@ static int pca9685_pwm_probe(struct i2c_client *client, > > return ret; > > } > > > > - /* The chip comes out of power-up in the active state */ > > - pm_runtime_set_active(&client->dev); > > - /* > > - * Enable will put the chip into suspend, which is what we > > - * want as all outputs are disabled at this point > > - */ > > - pm_runtime_enable(&client->dev); > > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM)) { > > This looks odd to me. I've seen similar constructs, but they usually go > something like this (I think): > > pm_runtime_enable(&client->dev); > > if (!pm_runtime_enabled(&client->dev)) { > /* resume device */ > } > > Which I guess in your would be somewhat the opposite and it wouldn't > actually resume the device but rather put it to sleep. Yes, I wanted to keep it in sleep mode if runtime PM is supported (to be woken up later) and otherwise just wake it up in probe. > > Perhaps something like this: > > pm_runtime_enable(&client->dev); > > if (pm_runtime_enabled(&client->dev)) { > pca9685_set_sleep_mode(pca, true); > pm_runtime_set_suspended(&client->dev); > } else { > /* wake the chip up on non-PM environments */ > pca9685_set_sleep_mode(pca, false); > } > > ? I think that's slightly more correct than your original because it > takes into account things like sysfs power control and such. It also > doesn't rely on the config option alone but instead uses the runtime > PM API to achieve this more transparently. Ah, yes, I missed the fact that runtime could be disabled 'at runtime' via sysfs as well, so yes, that's more correct and pm_runtime_enabled will just return false if !CONFIG_PM, so that should work as well. Thanks, Clemens