Jassi,
>>> See how mailbox_startup() tries to balance mbox->ops->startup() and
>>> mailbox_fini() the mbox->ops->shutdown() That's very fragile and the
>>> cause of imbalance between rpm enable/disable, unless your clients are
>>> buggy.
>>
>> Yeah, it is kinda messed up in the existing code, the startup defined
>> there is really for the controller and not the link, and that's why you
>> see all the ref-counting balancing logic. The rpm enable/disable being
>> called is on the controller's dev, not the link's dev - maybe that's
>> what confused you.
>>
> I wrote the driver for this api, so I do realize the rpm is on
> controller. Links are not devices anyways.
>
You might be missing the minor detail. The pm_runtime_enable is in
startup, which is called for every link. So, I get an unbalanced
warning, when I have
ipc_request_channel(client1); -> link1.startup
ipc_request_channel(clinet2); -> link2.startup
Anyway, it is a non-issue since I understand the context and the fix.
regards
Suman
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
