On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 1:05 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:16:09AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 11:17:47PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 1:01 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/base/power/main.c b/drivers/base/power/main.c
> > > > index 0992e67e862b..2a29c3d4e240 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/base/power/main.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/base/power/main.c
> > > > @@ -124,6 +124,10 @@ void device_pm_unlock(void)
> > > > */
> > > > void device_pm_add(struct device *dev)
> > > > {
> > > > + /* No need to create pm sysfs if explicitly specified as not
> > > > required */
> > >
> > > Is this really about sysfs?
> > >
> >
> > Nope, copy-paste from dpm_sysfs_add, will drop it.
> >
> > > > + if (device_pm_not_required(dev))
> > >
> > > Should power.disable_depth be bumped up here or while setting the "no PM"
> > > flag?
> > >
> >
> > OK, I missed that.
> >
>
> Looking at it,
> 1. We can't set it when we set "no PM" flag as pm_runtime_init called later
> initialise it to 1
> 2. We can bump it here, but I see it's usage self contained in runtime.c
> and may look odd to access it here.
>
> More basic question is should we really need to bump it to 2 as its
> initialised to 1 in runtime_init.
Right, I thought about that.
Let's leave it as is maybe. :-)
