linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/11] input: RMI4 core bus and sensor drivers.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4F0654E5.3010400@synaptics.com>
Date:	Thu, 5 Jan 2012 17:56:53 -0800
From:	Christopher Heiny <cheiny@...aptics.com>
To:	Shubhrajyoti <shubhrajyoti@...com>
CC:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
	Joerie de Gram <j.de.gram@...il.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	Naveen Kumar Gaddipati <naveen.gaddipati@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/11] input: RMI4 core bus and sensor drivers.

Hi Shubhrajyoti,

Thanks for the feedback.  Please see my comments below.


On 01/01/2012 10:38 PM, Shubhrajyoti wrote:
> Hi Christopher,
>
> On Thursday 22 December 2011 07:39 AM, Christopher Heiny wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Christopher Heiny<cheiny@...aptics.com>
>>
>> Cc: Dmitry Torokhov<dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
>> Cc: Linus Walleij<linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>
>> Cc: Naveen Kumar Gaddipati<naveen.gaddipati@...ricsson.com>
>> Cc: Joeri de Gram<j.de.gram@...il.com>
>>
>> ---
>>
>>   drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_bus.c    |  436 ++++++++++++
>>   drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c | 1488 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.h |   97 +++
>>   3 files changed, 2021 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_bus.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_bus.c

[snip]

>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
>> +static int rmi_bus_suspend(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> +#ifdef GENERIC_SUBSYS_PM_OPS
>> +	const struct dev_pm_ops *pm = dev->driver ? dev->driver->pm : NULL;
>> +
>> +	if (pm&&  pm->suspend)
>> +		return pm->suspend(dev);
> If driver-pm- suspend is not there should you not fall back to . suspend ?

I'm looking into using dev->driver->suspend() here.  It wants a 
pm_message_t for the pm state.  We don't have that on entry to 
bus_suspend, though.  Any suggestion as to what we should pass?

				Thanks,
					Chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/