From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751626AbdJPGbQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Oct 2017 02:31:16 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:45062 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750821AbdJPGbP (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Oct 2017 02:31:15 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 08:31:22 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux PM , Bjorn Helgaas , Alan Stern , LKML , Linux ACPI , Linux PCI , Linux Documentation , Mika Westerberg , Ulf Hansson , Andy Shevchenko , Kevin Hilman , Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] PM / core: Add NEVER_SKIP and SMART_PREPARE driver flags Message-ID: <20171016063122.GB28732@kroah.com> References: <3806130.B2KCK0tvef@aspire.rjw.lan> <1998650.Q52BuGQTI4@aspire.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1998650.Q52BuGQTI4@aspire.rjw.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 03:29:02AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > +static inline void dev_pm_set_driver_flags(struct device *dev, unsigned int flags) > +{ > + dev->power.driver_flags = flags; > +} Should this function just set the specific bit? Or is it going to be ok to set the whole value, meaning you aren't going to care about turning on and off specific flags over the lifetime of the driver/device, you are just going to set them once and then just test them as needed? thanks, greg k-h