[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51CBDCE5.1020301@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 09:34:13 +0300
From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>
To: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
<linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] radeon: use pdev->pm_cap instead of pci_find_capability(..,PCI_CAP_ID_PM)
On 27/06/13 04:51, Yijing Wang wrote:
> On 2013/6/26 21:15, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> I couldn't find the rest of this series, and I'm not familiar with PCI.
>> So: is this patch and "aty128fb: use pdev->pm_cap instead of
>> pci_find_capability(..,PCI_CAP_ID_PM)" safe to apply for fbdev-3.11
>> without anything else? I.e. has the PCI core changes been merged in 3.10
>> or ealier?
>
> Hi Tomi,
> Thanks for your reply. Yes, it's safe, because PCI core has been use pdev->pm_cap to save
> the pm capability offset already. And PCI core changes related this pm init code has been merged
> long long ago(since year 2008). This series changes just to simplifier driver code about pm code.
> It's not necessary to access pci device register to get pm cap again, drivers can use pci device pm_cap
> member. and this series had no changes in PCI core. The rest of this series like for bnx2, bnx2x etc has
> been tested and accepted by other subsystems.
Ok, thanks. I'll apply the two patches to my fbdev-3.11 branch.
Tomi
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (902 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists