From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=FAKE_REPLY_C, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 028F8C433E0 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 16:41:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1EAC206CD for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 16:41:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729613AbgGFQlh (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2020 12:41:37 -0400 Received: from netrider.rowland.org ([192.131.102.5]:60559 "HELO netrider.rowland.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1729420AbgGFQlg (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2020 12:41:36 -0400 Received: (qmail 706817 invoked by uid 1000); 6 Jul 2020 12:41:35 -0400 Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2020 12:41:35 -0400 From: Alan Stern To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Martin Kepplinger , jejb@linux.ibm.com, Can Guo , martin.petersen@oracle.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@puri.sm Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: sd: add runtime pm to open / release Message-ID: <20200706164135.GE704149@rowland.harvard.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200701004958.GA473187@rowland.harvard.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 20:49:58PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 04:31:58PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > On 2020-06-30 12:38, Alan Stern wrote: > > > Assume that BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT is set in flags. Then where exactly > > > does blk_queue_enter(q, flags) call blk_pm_request_resume(q)? > > > > Please take a look at how the *current* implementation of runtime power > > management works. Your question is relevant for the old implementation > > of runtime power management but not for the current implementation. > > What do you mean by "current"? I have been looking at the implementation > in 5.8-rc3 from Linus's tree. Should I look somewhere else? Any reply to this, or further concerns about the proposed patch? I'd like to fix up this API, and it appears that you are the only person to have worked on it significantly in the last two years. Alan Stern