On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 07:22:09AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> writes:
> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 06:02:35AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >> Wenyou Yang <wenyou.yang@atmel.com> writes:

> >> > +	if (!pm_runtime_suspended(dev)) {
> >> > +		clk_disable_unprepare(as->clk);
> >> > +		pinctrl_pm_select_sleep_state(dev);
> >> > +	}

> >> a.k.a. pm_runtime_put_sync() since the ->runtime_suspend() callback does
> >> the same thing.

> > Will that do the right thing when runtime PM is disabled in Kconfig?

> Good point.

> Then the way to make this cleaner, and obvious on inspection that system
> suspend/resume are doing the same thing as runtime suspend/resume is to
> have ->suspend call the runtime_suspend function.

> The runtime suspend/resume functions then should be wrapped in CONFIG_PM
> instead of CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME.

That sounds reasonable, yes.  I keep on wishing we didn't have so much
configurability in the PM :/