Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] PM / Domains: Take WAKEUP_PATH driver flag into account in genpd

On 30 December 2017 at 01:47, Rafael J. Wysocki [off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Ulf Hansson [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

In case the WAKEUP_PATH flag has been set in a later phase than from the
->suspend() callback, the PM core don't set the ->power.wakeup_path status
flag for the device. Therefore, let's be safe and check it explicitly.

Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <redacted>
---
 drivers/base/power/domain.c | 8 ++++++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/power/domain.c b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
index f9dcc98..32b4ba7 100644
--- a/drivers/base/power/domain.c
+++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c

@@ -1038,7 +1038,9 @@ static int genpd_finish_suspend(struct device *dev, bool poweroff)
        if (IS_ERR(genpd))
                return -EINVAL;

-       if (dev->power.wakeup_path && genpd_is_active_wakeup(genpd))
+       if ((dev->power.wakeup_path ||
+           dev_pm_test_driver_flags(dev, DPM_FLAG_WAKEUP_PATH)) &&

Shouldn't dev->power.wakeup_path be always set if DPM_FLAG_WAKEUP_PATH
is set as per the second patch in the series?

Not if DPM_FLAG_WAKEUP_PATH is set from a driver's ->suspend_late() callback.

To do that, the PM core would need to be adopted to set/propagate the
"wakeup_path" flag at __device_suspend_late(), similar to what is done
at __device_suspend().

[...]

Kind regards
Uffe