On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 11:58:56 AM Marek Szyprowski wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > > On 2016-09-08 23:25, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Hi Everyone, > > > > This is a refresh of the functional dependencies series that I posted last > > year and which has picked up by Marek quite recently. For reference, > > appended > > is my introductory message sent previously (which may be slightly outdated > > now). > > > > As last time, the first patch rearranges the code around > > __device_release_driver() > > a bit to prepare it for the next one (it actually hasn't changed AFAICS). > > > > The second patch introduces the actual device links mechanics, but without > > system suspend/resume and runtime PM support which are added by the > > subsequent > > patches. > > > > Some bugs found by Marek during his work on these patches should be fixed > > here. In particular, the endless recursion in device_reorder_to_tail() > > which simply was broken before. > > > > There are two additional patches to address the issue with runtime PM > > support > > that occured when runtime PM was disabled for some suppliers due to a PM > > sleep transition in progress. Those patches simply make runtime PM helpers > > return 0 in that case which may be controversial, so please let me know if > > there are concerns about those. > > > > The way device_link_add() works is a bit different, as it takes an > > additional > > status argument now. That makes it possible to create a link in any state, > > with extra care of course, and should address the problem pointed to by > > Lukas > > during the previous discussion. > > > > Also some comments from Tomeu have been addressed. > > > > This hasn't been really tested yet and I'm sort of relying on Marek to test > > it, because he has a use case ready. Hence, the RFT tag on the series. > > I've checked it with my updated Exynos SYSMMU patches and it works > really well. > Both runtime pm and system sleep. It took some time to do the test, because > this patchset changed somehow the probe order of the devices, what revealed > some issues related to incorrect driver and device registration in Samsung > Exynos FIMC-IS driver, but those were not related to Rafael's changes. > I will post my patches in a few minutes. > > Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprow...@samsung.com>
Thanks, much appreciated! > Rafael, BTW, didn't you plan to change the name of the device_link_add() > function to device_dependency_add() to avoid confusion with network device > "link"? I was concerned about the "devlink" name in particular, but I thought that struct device_link would be distinct enough. If not, I can still change it. Thanks, Rafael
