mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sonic Zhang <sonic.adi@gmail.com>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Cc: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver i2c-core: i2c bus should support PM entries in  struct dev_pm_ops.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:38:03 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4e5ebad50912142138he6eea0bqd790313c72b69f7@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091213221222.724bef54@hyperion.delvare>

You changes to the patch work OK for me.


Sonic Zhang


On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 5:12 AM, Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> wrote:
> Hi Sonic,
>
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2009 17:08:40 +0800, sonic zhang wrote:
>> Struct dev_pm_ops is not configured in current i2c bus type. i2c drivers
>> only depends on suspend/resume entries in struct dev_pm_ops are not
>> informed of PM suspend and resume events by i2c framework.
>
> Good point. I was wondering some times ago what was the status of
> pm_ops. I seem to understand this is the future of power management,
> and "direct" .suspend and .resume callbacks will stop being supported
> at some point in the future? If so, what is the migration plan? I don't
> really want to support both forever.
>
> Your patch introduces the following warnings:
>
> drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c: In function ‘i2c_device_pm_suspend’:
> drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c:167: warning: assignment discards qualifiers from pointer target type
> drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c: In function ‘i2c_device_pm_resume’:
> drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c:181: warning: assignment discards qualifiers from pointer target type
>
> You will obviously have to fix them before I can accept your patch.
> Missing const...
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sonic Zhang <sonic.zhang@analog.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c |   39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
>> index 2965043..9713c0d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
>> @@ -155,6 +155,39 @@ static void i2c_device_shutdown(struct device *dev)
>>               driver->shutdown(client);
>>  }
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND
>> +static int i2c_device_pm_suspend(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> +     struct i2c_driver *driver;
>> +     struct dev_pm_ops *pm;
>> +
>> +     if (!dev->driver)
>> +             return 0;
>> +     driver = to_i2c_driver(dev->driver);
>> +     pm = driver->driver.pm;
>
> This makes little sense, sorry. Why go from device_driver to i2c_driver
> and then again to device_driver? The following is equivalent and more
> efficient:
>
>        pm = dev->driver->pm;
>
>> +     if (!pm || !pm->suspend)
>> +             return 0;
>> +     return pm->suspend(dev);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int i2c_device_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> +     struct i2c_driver *driver;
>> +     struct dev_pm_ops *pm;
>> +
>> +     if (!dev->driver)
>> +             return 0;
>> +     driver = to_i2c_driver(dev->driver);
>> +     pm = driver->driver.pm;
>
> Same here.
>
>> +     if (!pm || !pm->resume)
>> +             return 0;
>> +     return pm->resume(dev);
>> +}
>> +#else
>> +# define i2c_device_pm_suspend       NULL
>> +# define i2c_device_pm_resume        NULL
>
> No space between "#" and "define", please.
>
>> +#endif
>> +
>>  static int i2c_device_suspend(struct device *dev, pm_message_t mesg)
>>  {
>>       struct i2c_client *client = i2c_verify_client(dev);
>> @@ -219,6 +252,11 @@ static const struct attribute_group *i2c_dev_attr_groups[] = {
>>       NULL
>>  };
>>
>> +static struct dev_pm_ops i2c_device_pm_ops = {
>
> Could be const.
>
>> +     .suspend = i2c_device_pm_suspend,
>> +     .resume = i2c_device_pm_resume,
>> +};
>> +
>>  struct bus_type i2c_bus_type = {
>>       .name           = "i2c",
>>       .match          = i2c_device_match,
>> @@ -227,6 +265,7 @@ struct bus_type i2c_bus_type = {
>>       .shutdown       = i2c_device_shutdown,
>>       .suspend        = i2c_device_suspend,
>>       .resume         = i2c_device_resume,
>> +     .pm             = &i2c_device_pm_ops,
>>  };
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(i2c_bus_type);
>>
>
> I've made all the changes above myself, it build OK but I can't test.
> Modified patch is here:
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/jdelvare/linux-2.6/jdelvare-i2c/i2c-core-i2c-bus-should-support-pm-entries-in-struct-dev_pm_ops.patch
>
> Please test and report if anything's wrong.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Jean Delvare
>

      reply	other threads:[~2009-12-15  5:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-12-02  9:08 sonic zhang
2009-12-04  9:24 ` Sonic Zhang
2009-12-13 21:12 ` Jean Delvare
2009-12-15  5:38   ` Sonic Zhang [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4e5ebad50912142138he6eea0bqd790313c72b69f7@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=sonic.adi@gmail.com \
    --cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®