[PATCH] spi: spi-cadence-quadspi: using pm_runtime_resume_and_get instead of pm_runtime_get_sync

[PATCH] spi: spi-cadence-quadspi: using pm_runtime_resume_and_get instead of pm_runtime_get_sync

[cgel.zte]

From: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@zte.com.cn>

Using pm_runtime_resume_and_get() to replace pm_runtime_get_sync and
pm_runtime_put_noidle. This change is just to simplify the code, no
actual functional changes.

Reported-by: Zeal Robot <zealci@zte.com.cn>
Signed-off-by: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@zte.com.cn>
---
 drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c | 6 ++----
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c b/drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c
index b0c9f62ccefb..eda0646fb6a1 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-cadence-quadspi.c
@@ -1707,11 +1707,9 @@ static int cqspi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	}
 
 	pm_runtime_enable(dev);
-	ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
-	if (ret < 0) {
-		pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
+	ret = pm_runtime_resume_and_get(dev);
+	if (ret < 0)
 		goto probe_master_put;
-	}
 
 	ret = clk_prepare_enable(cqspi->clk);
 	if (ret) {
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-cadence-quadspi: using pm_runtime_resume_and_get instead of pm_runtime_get_sync

[Mark Brown]

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:56:37 +0000, cgel.zte@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@zte.com.cn>
> 
> Using pm_runtime_resume_and_get() to replace pm_runtime_get_sync and
> pm_runtime_put_noidle. This change is just to simplify the code, no
> actual functional changes.
> 
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: spi-cadence-quadspi: using pm_runtime_resume_and_get instead of pm_runtime_get_sync
      commit: 3a2ac5809935e6043dae916bab6cf4741d9dcdeb

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark

[PATCH] spi: spi-cadence-quadspi: using pm_runtime_resume_and_get instead of pm_runtime_get_sync

[cgel.zte]

From: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@zte.com.cn>

Using pm_runtime_resume_and_get is more appropriate
for simplifing code

Reported-by: Zeal Robot <zealci@zte.com.cn>
Signed-off-by: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@zte.com.cn>
---
 drivers/spi/spi-mem.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-mem.c b/drivers/spi/spi-mem.c
index 0e8dafc62d94..7d7091aa0c22 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-mem.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-mem.c
@@ -262,9 +262,8 @@ static int spi_mem_access_start(struct spi_mem *mem)
 	if (ctlr->auto_runtime_pm) {
 		int ret;
 
-		ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(ctlr->dev.parent);
+		ret = pm_runtime_resume_and_get(ctlr->dev.parent);
 		if (ret < 0) {
-			pm_runtime_put_noidle(ctlr->dev.parent);
 			dev_err(&ctlr->dev, "Failed to power device: %d\n",
 				ret);
 			return ret;
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-cadence-quadspi: using pm_runtime_resume_and_get instead of pm_runtime_get_sync

[Mark Brown]

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 09:36:56 +0000, cgel.zte@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@zte.com.cn>
> 
> Using pm_runtime_resume_and_get is more appropriate
> for simplifing code
> 
> 

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: spi-cadence-quadspi: using pm_runtime_resume_and_get instead of pm_runtime_get_sync
      commit: 3a2ac5809935e6043dae916bab6cf4741d9dcdeb

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark