linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Run callback of device

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]

Date:	Fri, 07 Jun 2013 12:36:12 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	shuox.liu@...el.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	pavel@....cz, len.brown@...el.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Run callback of device_prepare/complete consistently

On Friday, June 07, 2013 04:20:30 PM shuox.liu@...el.com wrote:
> dpm_run_callback is used in other stages of power states changing.
> It provides debug info message and time measurement when call these
> callback. We also want to benefit ->prepare and ->complete.
> 
> [PATCH 1/2] PM: use dpm_run_callback in device_prepare
> [PATCH 2/2] PM: add dpm_run_callback_void and use it in device_complete

Is this an "Oh, why don't we do that?" series, or is it useful for anything
in practice?  I'm asking, because we haven't added that stuff to start with
since we didn't see why it would be useful to anyone.

And while patch [1/2] reduces the code size (by 1 line), so I can see some
(tiny) benefit from applying it, patch [2/2] adds more code and is there any
paractical reason?

Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/