On 05/10/11 17:59, Ulf Hansson wrote:
I am not that into how the sdhci host drivers is working, myself is more working
with the mmci driver and about to sent out patches with improved power
management support soon. I would like to take the opportunity to discuss in
general pm_runtime for mmc/sd/sdio.
Right now the mmc framework supports MMC_CAP_DISABLE, which means the host
driver shall implement an enable/disable function. Very similar to what
pm_runtime can be used for, but pm_runtime is a more modern way of solving power
management. Is this your overall view on this as well?
Yes
Anyway, I would then suggest that it should be the framework responsibilities of
doing:
1. pm_runtime_get_sync -> To make sure the mmc host is runtime resumed before
the framework is using it. This could be done when "claiming" the host or more
precisely as the first thing in the mmc_host_enable function.
2. pm_runtime_mark_last_busy -> To put a time stamp at the last time the
framework used the mmc host. This could be done as the first thing in
mmc_host_lazy_disable/mmc_host_disable.
3. pm_runtime_put_sync_autosuspend -> To trigger the timer of runtime suspending
the mmc host driver. This could be done as the first thing in
mmc_host_lazy_disable/mmc_host_disable.
The mmc host drivers will be responsible of the following:
1. Implementing the runtime_resume, runtime_suspend and possibly runtime_idle
functions and register them in the device driver struct.
2. Initializing and setup pm_runtime for the mmc host driver. For example use:
pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay
pm_runtime_use_autosuspend
pm_runtime_enable
It has been discussed on the list before that the host controller driver should
be solely responsible for host controller power.
Moreover 1:
I have noticed the pm_runtime support is implemented for sdio and when having
MMC_CAP_POWER_OFF_CARD. This needs to be "cleaned up" after such a change. It
might also conflict with your patch considering "moreover 2" below.
No. The card and the host controller are separate devices. The card can be
powered up when the host controller is off and vice versa. They are not
inter-dependent in that regard.
Moreover 2:
dev_pm_ops with runtime functions, are implemented for the mmc bus (core/bus.c).
Maybe this should be moved from the responsibility of the bus into the mmc host
drivers instead!? I think it makes more sense to leave such decisions as doing
"mmc_power_save_host/mmc_power_restore_host" to each mmc host driver. Just
because we get runtime suspended that does not have to mean we wnat to do
mmc_power_save_host... What do you think?
Again, this has been discussed before on the list, that the power management of
the card is something that only upper layers control e.g. sdio function driver
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
