[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ASoC: cs42l42: add missed regulator_bulk_disable in remove and fix probe failure
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 1:00 AM Mark Brown <> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 12:52:30AM +0800, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
> > I have a question that what if CONFIG_PM is not defined?
> > Since I have met runtime PM before in the patch
> > a31eda65ba21 ("net: fec: fix clock count mis-match").
> > I learned there that in some cases CONFIG_PM is not defined so runtime PM
> > cannot take effect.
> > Therefore, undo operations should still exist in remove functions.
> There's also the case where runtime PM is there and the device is active
> at suspend - it's not that there isn't a problem, it's that we can't
> unconditionally do a disable because we don't know if there was a
> matching enable. It'll need to be conditional on the runtime PM state.

How about adding a check like #ifndef CONFIG_PM?
I use this in an old version of the mentioned patch.
However, that is not accepted since it seems not symmetric with enable
in the probe.
But I don't find an explicit runtime PM call in the probe here so the
revision pattern of
("net: fec: fix clock count mis-match") seems not applicable.
So I think adding a check is acceptable here, at least it solves the problem.

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-10 02:32    [W:0.039 / U:1.680 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site