Hello,
On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 09:49:24PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 04:38:36PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 at 11:41, Sakari Ailus sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com wrote:
Hello everyone,
This set will switch the users of pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() to __pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() while the former will soon be re-purposed to include a call to pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(). The two are almost always used together, apart from bugs which are likely common. Going forward, most new users should be using pm_runtime_put_autosuspend().
Once this conversion is done and pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() re-purposed, I'll post another set to merge the calls to __pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() and pm_runtime_mark_last_busy().
That sounds like it could cause a lot of churns.
Why not add a new helper function that does the pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() and the pm_runtime_mark_last_busy() things? Then we can start moving users over to this new interface, rather than having this intermediate step?
I think the API would be nicer if we used the shortest and simplest function names for the most common use cases. Following pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() with pm_runtime_mark_last_busy() is that most common use case. That's why I like Sakari's approach of repurposing pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(), and introducing __pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() for the odd cases where pm_runtime_mark_last_busy() shouldn't be called.
That's ok for me. However this patch series isn't the optimal path to there because most drivers (i.e. those that already today do pm_runtime_mark_last_busy() in combination with pm_runtime_put_autosuspend()) have to be patched twice.
The saner route is: Only convert the drivers with a sole pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() (i.e. without pm_runtime_mark_last_busy()) to __pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(). Then add the mark_last_busy() bits to pm_runtime_put_autosuspend() and then drop the explicit calls to pm_runtime_mark_last_busy() before pm_runtime_put_autosuspend().
(Note this doesn't take into account Rafael's position that pm_runtime_put() might be the saner option. My argument applies for that conversion analogously.)
Best regards Uwe