| Message ID | 1511538800-8275-4-git-send-email-mmaddireddy@nvidia.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add loadable kernel module and power management support | expand |
On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Manikanta Maddireddy <mmaddireddy@nvidia.com> wrote: > In 'commit 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS")' > PM QoS resume latency modified 0 as "no latency at all". However > dev_pm_qos_raw_read_value() returns 0 for devices which doesn't have > PM QoS constraints. This is blocking runtime suspend for these devices > in rpm_check_suspend_allowed(). Return PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY_NO_CONSTRAINT > when PM QoS constraints are not available for a particular device. > > Fixes: 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS") That commit has been reverted, so this patch is not applicable and therefore the whole series isn't. What kernel is it based off? Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 05:50:42PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Manikanta Maddireddy > <mmaddireddy@nvidia.com> wrote: > > In 'commit 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS")' > > PM QoS resume latency modified 0 as "no latency at all". However > > dev_pm_qos_raw_read_value() returns 0 for devices which doesn't have > > PM QoS constraints. This is blocking runtime suspend for these devices > > in rpm_check_suspend_allowed(). Return PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY_NO_CONSTRAINT > > when PM QoS constraints are not available for a particular device. > > > > Fixes: 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS") > > That commit has been reverted, so this patch is not applicable and > therefore the whole series isn't. > > What kernel is it based off? It looks like this might have crept in via commit 0759e80b84e3 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency framework"). But checking more closely, that commit actually incorporates this change already. According to the git log the correct commit for this showed up in linux-next only today, which is probably why Manikanta missed it. Manikanta: can you try rebasing your series on top of next-20171124? git should notice that this particular change is already part of that and drop it during the rebase. Thierry
On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 05:50:42PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Manikanta Maddireddy >> <mmaddireddy@nvidia.com> wrote: >> > In 'commit 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS")' >> > PM QoS resume latency modified 0 as "no latency at all". However >> > dev_pm_qos_raw_read_value() returns 0 for devices which doesn't have >> > PM QoS constraints. This is blocking runtime suspend for these devices >> > in rpm_check_suspend_allowed(). Return PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY_NO_CONSTRAINT >> > when PM QoS constraints are not available for a particular device. >> > >> > Fixes: 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS") >> >> That commit has been reverted, so this patch is not applicable and >> therefore the whole series isn't. >> >> What kernel is it based off? > > It looks like this might have crept in via commit 0759e80b84e3 ("PM / > QoS: Fix device resume latency framework"). But checking more closely, > that commit actually incorporates this change already. > > According to the git log the correct commit for this showed up in > linux-next only today, which is probably why Manikanta missed it. Well, it's been in the Linus' tree for a week, though. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 25-Nov-17 5:32 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 9:39 PM, Thierry Reding > <thierry.reding@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 05:50:42PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Manikanta Maddireddy >>> <mmaddireddy@nvidia.com> wrote: >>>> In 'commit 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS")' >>>> PM QoS resume latency modified 0 as "no latency at all". However >>>> dev_pm_qos_raw_read_value() returns 0 for devices which doesn't have >>>> PM QoS constraints. This is blocking runtime suspend for these devices >>>> in rpm_check_suspend_allowed(). Return PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY_NO_CONSTRAINT >>>> when PM QoS constraints are not available for a particular device. >>>> >>>> Fixes: 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS") >>> >>> That commit has been reverted, so this patch is not applicable and >>> therefore the whole series isn't. >>> >>> What kernel is it based off? >> >> It looks like this might have crept in via commit 0759e80b84e3 ("PM / >> QoS: Fix device resume latency framework"). But checking more closely, >> that commit actually incorporates this change already. >> >> According to the git log the correct commit for this showed up in >> linux-next only today, which is probably why Manikanta missed it. > > Well, it's been in the Linus' tree for a week, though. > > Thanks, > Rafael > I dropped this patch in V2. Thanks, Manikanta -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/include/linux/pm_qos.h b/include/linux/pm_qos.h index 6737a8c9e8c6..d68b0569a5eb 100644 --- a/include/linux/pm_qos.h +++ b/include/linux/pm_qos.h @@ -175,7 +175,8 @@ static inline s32 dev_pm_qos_requested_flags(struct device *dev) static inline s32 dev_pm_qos_raw_read_value(struct device *dev) { return IS_ERR_OR_NULL(dev->power.qos) ? - 0 : pm_qos_read_value(&dev->power.qos->resume_latency); + PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY_NO_CONSTRAINT : + pm_qos_read_value(&dev->power.qos->resume_latency); } #else static inline enum pm_qos_flags_status __dev_pm_qos_flags(struct device *dev,
In 'commit 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS")' PM QoS resume latency modified 0 as "no latency at all". However dev_pm_qos_raw_read_value() returns 0 for devices which doesn't have PM QoS constraints. This is blocking runtime suspend for these devices in rpm_check_suspend_allowed(). Return PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY_NO_CONSTRAINT when PM QoS constraints are not available for a particular device. Fixes: 0cc2b4e5a020 ("PM / QoS: Fix device resume latency PM QoS") Signed-off-by: Manikanta Maddireddy <mmaddireddy@nvidia.com> --- include/linux/pm_qos.h | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)