Re: [PATCH v2] ASoC: soc-core: Create device_link to ensure correct suspend order

[Mark Brown]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2026 at 05:04:51PM +0100, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
> On 19/6/26 16:54, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2026 at 02:33:36PM +0100, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:

> > > Mark - should we revert this because of too many corner cases in the
> > > device_link code and go back to every codec driver with a system_suspend
> > > installing its own device_link to ensure correct suspend order compared
> > > to the machine driver?

> > If you go back to this you still have a situation where ASoC
> > mostly does the right order it just took you more code to get
> > there. Also I think you would need to install the link from the
> > machine driver, since the codec driver could be used in
> > situations where it is or isn't a child of the machine driver, as
> > you noted earlier.

> > Personally I would vote for just skipping the case where the
> > machine driver is a parent of the card.

> We're still in the merge window, so it's not something anyone should be
> using on critical hardware or daily driver PCs. We can think about it
> for a few days.

> We could also deal with the case that card->dev ==
> component->dev->parent, then give some time for more people to test and
> see if anything else breaks.

Another option is to delay for a further cycle (which was where I was
coming from with the revert comment), though I'm now wondering if we're
more likely to shake stuff out with things sitting in Linus' tree than
we are in -next.  It did go into -next fairly late in the cycle, but I
expect more people to test mainline than -next.

I was kind of wondering if it might be more robust to ignore errors from
failing to link thing but since we need to manually remove the links
that's a lot of effort for something ultimately hacky.  It would be
nicer to just fix up a few specific cases.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature