Re: [PATCH] coresight: cti: Correct the parameter for pm_runtime_put

[Leo Yan]

Hi Tao,

On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 05:29:37PM +0800, Tao Zhang wrote:
> The input parameter of the function pm_runtime_put should be the
> same in the function cti_enable_hw and cti_disable_hw. The correct
> parameter to use here should be dev->parent.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tao Zhang <quic_taozha@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-core.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-core.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-core.c
> index e2a3620..8988b2e 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-core.c
> @@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ static int cti_disable_hw(struct cti_drvdata *drvdata)
>  	coresight_disclaim_device_unlocked(csdev);
>  	CS_LOCK(drvdata->base);
>  	spin_unlock(&drvdata->spinlock);
> -	pm_runtime_put(dev);
> +	pm_runtime_put(dev->parent);

coresight_register() allocates data structure 'coresight_device' and
assigns probed device to the field 'coresight_device::dev::parent';
thus afterwards we need to pass 'coresight_device::dev::parent' for
pm_runtime_xxx() functions.  It's not directive for understanding, so
log the info at here.

For the patch:

Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@xxxxxxxxxx>

We could wait for Mike to review as well.

Thanks,
Leo

>  	return 0;
>  
>  	/* not disabled this call */
> -- 
> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
>