Hi,
On 1/22/21 10:38 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 2:03 AM Hans de Goede hdegoede@redhat.com wrote:
On 1/18/21 1:02 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 6:06 PM Hans de Goede hdegoede@redhat.com wrote:
...
Can you elaborate switchings from get() to get_sync() in few places
Sorry, those 2 changes really should have been in a separate commit. I've put the 2 get -> get_sync() changed in their own commit now with the following commit-msg:
""" extcon: arizona: Always use pm_runtime_get_sync() when we need the device to be awake
Before this commit the extcon-arizona code was mixing pm_runtime_get() and pm_runtime_get_sync() in different places. In all cases where either function is called we make use of the device immediately
called and we
That changes the meaning of the sentence in ways which does not match my intent. I've changed this to:
""" In all cases where pm_runtime_get[_sync]() is called, the code makes use of the device immediately after the call. This means that we should always use pm_runtime_get_sync(). """
Regards,
Hans