[PATCH v6 09/16] OMAP2+: UART: Add runtime pm support for omap-serial driver

[Kevin Hilman]

Govindraj <govindraj.ti at gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman at ti.com> wrote:
>> "Govindraj.R" <govindraj.raja at ti.com> writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> Use device_may_wakeup to check whether uart has wakeup capabilities
>>> and then enable uart runtime usage for the uart.
>>
>> Curious about what happens when device_may_wakeup() is not set during
>> device init.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> @@ -1305,6 +1363,16 @@ static int serial_omap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>               up->uart_dma.rx_dma_channel = OMAP_UART_DMA_CH_FREE;
>>>       }
>>>
>>> +     pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(&pdev->dev);
>>> +     pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(&pdev->dev,
>>> +                     OMAP_UART_AUTOSUSPEND_DELAY);
>>> +
>>> +     pm_runtime_irq_safe(&pdev->dev);
>>> +     if (device_may_wakeup(&pdev->dev)) {
>>> +             pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
>>
>> So if device_may_wakeup() is false, runtime PM is not enabled, then...
>>
>>> +             pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev);
>>
>> ...this get doesn't happen, and the first register access causes a crash.
>
> Actually no crash, clocks will left enabled from boot up (hwmod_no_reset/idle)
> that are idled and enabled back here.
>
> Since hwmod_idle is binded here later ([PATCH v6 15/16]),

IMO, That's not a very maintainable solution.   

What happens when when someone fixes serial.c to only set
HWMOD_INIT_NO_IDLE on the console UART?  or if we fix things so we don't
need INIT_NO_IDLE anymore?  Then this will crash.

Driver code should not make assumptions like this about what device init
code is or isn't doing.

Kevin