Re: [PATCH] driver core: Call pm_runtime_put_sync() only after device_remove()

[Marc Kleine-Budde]

On 17.05.2023 10:28:01, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Right, but we do have drivers that have CONFIG_PM as an explicit
> dependency.
> 
> > In the end something like 72362dcdf654 ("can: mcp251xfd:
> > mcp251xfd_unregister(): simplify runtime PM handling") might be an
> > approach. But IMHO it's more complicated than it should be and honestly
> > I'm not sure if it's safe and correct this way.
> 
> Yeah, unfortunately runtime PM is fairly underspecified so we end up
> with this multitude of implementations, many of which are broken in
> various ways. A smaller API with documented best-practices may have
> helped, but that's not where we are right now.
> 
> Looks like 72362dcdf654 ("can: mcp251xfd: mcp251xfd_unregister():
> simplify runtime PM handling") introduces yet another way to do things,
> and which will break if anyone enables (or tries to use this pattern in
> another driver with) autosuspend...

ACK - I think in that driver it works, as the runtime PM is resumed
during interface up and suspended in interface down. IMHO autosuspend
would not bring any benefits here...

regards,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde          |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de |
Vertretung Nürnberg              | Phone: +49-5121-206917-129 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-9   |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature