PM: fix irq enable/disable in runtime PM code

This patch (as1305) fixes a bug in the irq-enable settings and removes
some related overhead in the runtime PM code.

	In __pm_runtime_resume(), within the scope of the original
	spin_lock_irq(), we know that irqs are disabled.  There's no
	reason to go through a pair of enable/disable cycles when
	acquiring and releasing the parent's lock.

	In __pm_runtime_set_status(), irqs are already disabled when
	the parent's lock is acquired, and they must remain disabled
	when it is released.

Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
This commit is contained in:
Alan Stern 2009-11-25 01:06:37 +01:00 committed by Rafael J. Wysocki
parent a8a8a669ea
commit 862f89b3d4
1 changed files with 6 additions and 6 deletions

View File

@ -328,11 +328,11 @@ int __pm_runtime_resume(struct device *dev, bool from_wq)
* necessary.
*/
parent = dev->parent;
spin_unlock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
spin_unlock(&dev->power.lock);
pm_runtime_get_noresume(parent);
spin_lock_irq(&parent->power.lock);
spin_lock(&parent->power.lock);
/*
* We can resume if the parent's run-time PM is disabled or it
* is set to ignore children.
@ -343,9 +343,9 @@ int __pm_runtime_resume(struct device *dev, bool from_wq)
if (parent->power.runtime_status != RPM_ACTIVE)
retval = -EBUSY;
}
spin_unlock_irq(&parent->power.lock);
spin_unlock(&parent->power.lock);
spin_lock_irq(&dev->power.lock);
spin_lock(&dev->power.lock);
if (retval)
goto out;
goto repeat;
@ -777,7 +777,7 @@ int __pm_runtime_set_status(struct device *dev, unsigned int status)
}
if (parent) {
spin_lock_irq(&parent->power.lock);
spin_lock(&parent->power.lock);
/*
* It is invalid to put an active child under a parent that is
@ -793,7 +793,7 @@ int __pm_runtime_set_status(struct device *dev, unsigned int status)
atomic_inc(&parent->power.child_count);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&parent->power.lock);
spin_unlock(&parent->power.lock);
if (error)
goto out;