[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201205072237.58753.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 22:37:58 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>, ming.m.lin@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Zheng Yan <zheng.z.yan@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/5] PM, Runtime, Add power_must_be_on flag
On Saturday, May 05, 2012, huang ying wrote:
> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 3:50 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:13 AM, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote:
> >> --- a/include/linux/pm.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/pm.h
> >> @@ -536,6 +536,7 @@ struct dev_pm_info {
> >> unsigned int irq_safe:1;
> >> unsigned int use_autosuspend:1;
> >> unsigned int timer_autosuspends:1;
> >> + unsigned int power_must_be_on:1;
> >> enum rpm_request request;
> >> enum rpm_status runtime_status;
> >> int runtime_error;
> >
> > It's a little weird to just add the field, with no users. Would it
> > make sense to pull out the bits of patch 5 that use this and combine
> > them into a single smaller patch?
>
> This patch is needed by some other subsystem too, such as ZPODD
> support in following patchset:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/3/28/23
>
> The original plan is to merge this into linux-pm.git firstly, then
> merge various usage of this flag into various subsystem git tree.
> That will make cross-tree merging a little easier. Is it possible?
>
> > But see related comments there; it
> > might be safer to have a function that computes this whenever you need
> > it instead of caching the value.
>
> This flag may be used (or calculated if implemented as a function)
> when device is in suspended state. Reason is as follow from the
> changelog of this patch.
>
> "
> In general, whether to put a device into power off state should be
> decided by the driver of the device, but for some buses, whether to
> put a device into power off state may be done by the parent of the
> device. For example, a PCIe end point device may be put into power
> off state by the PCIe port connected to it.
> "
>
> If all devices can calculate "power_must_be_on" when it is in
> suspended state, then this will be a design choice.
>
> Hi, Rafael,
>
> What do you think about the idea to replace .power_must_be_on with a
> function
That looks like a static characteristics of a device (ie. one that's not going
to change at run time), so it seems better to use a flag for it.
> (maybe add a new callback in pm_ops)?
Please don't do that. We have many of them already.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists