Re: [PATCH v1 19/23] pmdomain: imx: gpcv2: Discard pm_runtime_put() return value

[Ulf Hansson]

On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 at 15:07, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Ulf,
>
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2025 at 4:52 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 at 21:37, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Passing pm_runtime_put() return value to the callers is not particularly
> > > useful.
> > >
> > > Returning an error code from pm_runtime_put() merely means that it has
> > > not queued up a work item to check whether or not the device can be
> > > suspended and there are many perfectly valid situations in which that
> > > can happen, like after writing "on" to the devices' runtime PM "control"
> > > attribute in sysfs for one example.
> > >
> > > Accordingly, update imx_pgc_domain_suspend() to simply discard the
> > > return value of pm_runtime_put() and always return success to the
> > > caller.
> > >
> > > This will facilitate a planned change of the pm_runtime_put() return
> > > type to void in the future.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Applied for next, thanks!
>
> Since you applied this one, I'm assuming no objections, so I'm going
> to queue it up separately along with the patch changing
> pm_runtime_put() to void because I would prefer to make that change in
> 7.0 to dragging it for another cycle.
>
> An ACK would be helpful though, I think.

I was still hoping that Linus was considering to pull my pull-request
for pmdomain, but it seems like that may happen. Assuming that doesn't
change, I can re-base my next branch on Monday to drop $subject patch,
but please wait until my confirmation so we don't end up having two
commits in linux-next for the same change.

Kind regards
Uffe

>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > This patch is part of a series, but it doesn't depend on anything else
> > > in that series.  The last patch in the series depends on it.
> > >
> > > It can be applied by itself and if you decide to do so, please let me
> > > know.
> > >
> > > Otherwise, an ACK or equivalent will be appreciated, but also the lack
> > > of specific criticism will be eventually regarded as consent.
> > >
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/pmdomain/imx/gpcv2.c |    4 +++-
> > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > --- a/drivers/pmdomain/imx/gpcv2.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/pmdomain/imx/gpcv2.c
> > > @@ -1420,7 +1420,9 @@ static int imx_pgc_domain_suspend(struct
> > >
> > >  static int imx_pgc_domain_resume(struct device *dev)
> > >  {
> > > -       return pm_runtime_put(dev);
> > > +       pm_runtime_put(dev);
> > > +
> > > +       return 0;
> > >  }
> > >  #endif
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >