Re: [PATCH 0/2] clk: imx: add missing pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() calls

[Frank Li]

On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 09:25:33AM +0200, Joshua Crofts wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2026 13:36:11 -0500
> Frank Li <Frank.li@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 07:15:29PM +0200, Joshua Crofts wrote:
> > > On Thu, 17 Sept 2026 at 18:26, Frank Li <Frank.li@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 10:42:33AM +0200, Joshua Crofts wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 17 Sep 2026 10:24:29 +0200
> > > > > Joshua Crofts <joshua.crofts1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2026 11:11:54 -0500
> > > > > > Frank Li <Frank.li@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 11:24:32AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2026 at 10:33:43AM +0000, Joshua Crofts wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Several drivers in the clk subsystem forget to call dont_use_autosuspend()
> > > > > > > > > on teardown or error, causing potential resource leaks. This series adds
> > > > > > > > > the missing calls.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No, as I've explained repeatedly elsewhere, it does not cause any
> > > > > > > > resource leaks. [1][2]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The autosuspend setting leaks if you will, but that only matters in the
> > > > > > > > theoretical corner case of someone rebinding a different driver (which
> > > > > > > > will soon also taint the kernel).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So don't exaggerate the impact, this is essentially just a cleanup,
> > > > > > > > which is fine in itself.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is it possilbe to create/improve runtime pm API, let runtime_pm enable/disable
> > > > > > > include these pair functions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I get many similar patches since scan tools is more powerful now.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I suppose that could work. One would still have to scrub the kernel of legacy
> > > > > > use/dont_use_autosuspend() calls though, so it could end up being a large
> > > > > > patchset.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On second thought, some drivers do tend to disable PM runtime system sleep
> > > > > etc. so it probably isn't as simple as adding the autosuspend stuff to
> > > > > enable/disable.
> > > >
> > > > if runtime pm disable, does autosuspend still work? suppose it should be
> > > > disable also
> > >
> > > If we add dont_use_autosuspend to disable then every time the system suspends
> > > and resumes we lose the autosuspend config, meaning it will never autosuspend
> > > again.
> > >
> > > I guess adding dont_use manually to the driver's remove() function is the only
> > > way (which according to my cocci script it's 195 drivers that should be patched)
> >
> > Extend with exist pm_runtime_enable() and passdown delay value. if delay
> > value is 0, actually it is no autosuspend version.
> >
> > and merge dont_use_autosuspend() into disable function. And actually
> > I don't understand why need two varible autosuspend_delay and use_autosuspend.
> >
> > when autosuspend_delay 0, means take action immediately.
>
> Actually, what about putting dont_use_autosuspend() in pm_runtime_reinit()?
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.3-rc3/source/drivers/base/power/runtime.c#L1865
>
> driver core calls this in device_unbind_cleanup(), meaning driver core would
> just handle it.

Yes, much better.

Frank
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Joshua Crofts