Hi Harigovindan On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 04:04:38PM +0530, Harigovindan P wrote:

ti-sn65dsi86 bridge is enumerated as a runtime device.

Adding sleep ops to force runtime_suspend when PM suspend is requested on the device.

Patch looks correct - but could you please explain why it is needed. What is the gain compared to not having this patch.

I ask for two reasons: 1) I really do not know 2) this info should be in the changelog

Without a better changelog no ack from me - sorry.

Sam

Signed-off-by: Harigovindan P harigovi@codeaurora.org

Changes in v2:

• Include bridge name in the commit message and

remove dependent patchwork link from the commit text as bridge is independent of OEM(Stephen Boyd)

drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c index 6ad688b320ae..2eef755b2917 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c @@ -159,6 +159,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused ti_sn_bridge_suspend(struct device *dev)

static const struct dev_pm_ops ti_sn_bridge_pm_ops = { SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(ti_sn_bridge_suspend, ti_sn_bridge_resume, NULL)

• SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(pm_runtime_force_suspend,

• 		pm_runtime_force_resume)
  

};

static int status_show(struct seq_file *s, void *data)

2.27.0