Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] driver core / pmdomain: Add support for fined grained sync_state

[Ulf Hansson]

On Thu, 16 Apr 2026 at 11:15, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Ulf,
>
> On Fri, 10 Apr 2026 at 12:41, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Since the introduction [1] of the common sync_state support for pmdomains
> > (genpd), we have encountered a lot of various interesting problems. In most
> > cases the new behaviour of genpd triggered some weird platform specific bugs.
> >
> > That said, in LPC in Tokyo me and Saravana hosted a session to walk through the
> > remaining limitations that we have found for genpd's sync state support. In
> > particular, we discussed the problems we have for the so-called onecell power
> > domain providers, where a single provider typically provides multiple
> > independent power domains, all with their own set of consumers.
> >
> > Note that, onecell power domain providers are very common. It's being used by
> > many SoCs/platforms/technologies. To name a few:
> > SCMI, Qualcomm, NXP, Mediatek, Renesas, TI, etc.
> >
> > Anyway, in these cases, the generic sync_state mechanism with fw_devlink isn't
> > fine grained enough, as we end up waiting for all consumers for all power
> > domains before the ->sync_callback gets called for the supplier/provider. In
> > other words, we may end up keeping unused power domains powered-on, for no good
> > reasons.
> >
> > The series intends to fix this problem. Please have a look at the commit
> > messages for more details and help review/test!
>
> Thanks for the update!
>
> At first glance, the only real change compared to v1 seems to be
> the removal of printing
>
>     pr_info("%s:%s con=%s\n", __func__, dev_name(dev),
>             dev_name(consumer));
>
> Right?

Correct! I forgot to include a version history, sorry.

Besides the removed print, I have just added your tags and updated the
commit message in patch9.

FYI, my plan is to queue this as soon as v7.1-rc1 is available.

Kind regards
Uffe