* Mark Brown [off-list ref] [160211 10:38]:

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 09:36:20AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:

quoted

* Mark Brown [off-list ref] [160211 07:54]:

quoted

quoted

This does sound like there's been a change in the interface compared to
what users are actually doing - is this an actual problem or is it just
a divergence from docs?

quoted

It's an actual problem at least on omaps as the omap_device code
is very picky about the hardware state.

quoted

Depending how the PM runtime is implemented, it may be a problem
for some other cases too.

Or people just aren't testing mainline that well (if this is broken in
v4.5 that suggests nobody noticed in -next) - do you know when this
broke?  It really seems like we may need to spin round on how this is
deployed.

I noticed it only with v4.5-rc1 and bisected it to commit 5de85b9d57ab
("PM / runtime: Re-init runtime PM states at probe error and driver
unbind") as it broke my PM tests for n900. For Linux next probably
was also broken for before that for some time.

Unfortunately based on the regressions I'm chasing every merge window
I'm suspecting that very few people are actually testing PM runtime
with mainline Linux kernel. Or they don't have the PM runtime fully
implemented in the mainline kernel for their devices. This is at
least for the SoC PM use case.

Ulf is working on a generic PM runtime test driver :) I'm hoping we
can then use that for basic regression testing on in an arch
independent way.

Regards,

Tony