Re: [PATCH] PM / domains: Kconfig: always enable PM_RUNTIME when genpd enabled

[Ulf Hansson]

On 13 November 2014 23:28, Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> It makes little sense to use generic power domains without runtime PM.
> Also, since the complexities of handling the !PM_RUNTIME case are
> causing more trouble and confusion than they're worth, let's simplify
> the world by making genpd always enable runtime PM.

I do agree that your above statement seems reasonable, even if can't
really tell if that would break some SOCs use-cases.

My concern is though, that I fear we will be taking short-cuts in
genpd that might bite us later on, but I might be wrong.

The reason for my concern is that on every other place, like in the
subsystem level, driver core, PM core and of course in drivers -  we
need to cope with all the combinations of CONFIG_PM_SLEEP and
CONFIG_PM_SLEEP.  So theoretically, why shouldn't genpd be able to do
that as well?

>
> Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@xxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/power/Kconfig | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/power/Kconfig b/kernel/power/Kconfig
> index 3d39cc0228e9..2a8c64d0a43c 100644
> --- a/kernel/power/Kconfig
> +++ b/kernel/power/Kconfig
> @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ config PM_CLK
>
>  config PM_GENERIC_DOMAINS
>         bool
> -       depends on PM
> +       select PM_RUNTIME

Shouldn't we actually depend on PM_RUNTIME instead?

>
>  config WQ_POWER_EFFICIENT_DEFAULT
>         bool "Enable workqueue power-efficient mode by default"
> --
> 2.1.3
>

Kind regards
Uffe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/