On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 at 05:57, kehuanlin <chgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The rpm_resume() will call parent's resume callback recursively.
> Since mmc_host has no its own pm_runtime callbacks, the mmc devices
> may fail to resume (-ENOSYS in rpm_callback) sometimes. Mark mmc_host
> device with pm_runtime_no_callbacks can fix the issue.
Can you please elaborate more on this? What do you mean by "sometimes"?
More precisely, how do you trigger the rpm_callback() for mmc class
device to return -ENOSYS?
Don't get me wrong, the patch is fine, but I want to understand if it
actually solves a problem for you - or that it's better considered as
an optimization?
Kind regards
Uffe
>
> Signed-off-by: kehuanlin <chgo...@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/core/host.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/host.c b/drivers/mmc/core/host.c
> index 9b89a91b6b47..177bebd9a6c4 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/host.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/host.c
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
> #include <linux/of.h>
> #include <linux/of_gpio.h>
> #include <linux/pagemap.h>
> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
> #include <linux/pm_wakeup.h>
> #include <linux/export.h>
> #include <linux/leds.h>
> @@ -480,6 +481,7 @@ struct mmc_host *mmc_alloc_host(int extra, struct device
> *dev)
> host->class_dev.class = &mmc_host_class;
> device_initialize(&host->class_dev);
> device_enable_async_suspend(&host->class_dev);
> + pm_runtime_no_callbacks(&host->class_dev);
>
> if (mmc_gpio_alloc(host)) {
> put_device(&host->class_dev);
> --
> 2.30.0
>
