linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/17] spi: pl022: Don't ignore power domain and amba bus at system suspend

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:	Wed, 19 Feb 2014 15:15:06 +0100
From:	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...pv.it>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
	Chris Ball <chris@...ntf.net>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/17] spi: pl022: Don't ignore power domain and amba bus
 at system suspend

On 10 February 2014 13:51, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 01:33:50PM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> On 4 February 2014 20:16, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> > This seems like a fairly hideous thing to be having to open code in an
>> > individual driver, it all looks generic and like something that most if
>
> ...
>
>> > Putting it in a helper would at least mean that it's easier for the
>> > mechanics to be transferred to the core proper later on.
>
>> I agree, a helper function would be nice. I have earlier sent a patch
>> to the PM core, that is similar to the code above, though it was
>> rejected in it's current form. Let me follow up on this again.
>
>> At this point, would a way forward be to still go ahead with this
>> patch and then convert to, when/if, the helper function from the PM
>> core becomes available?
>
> It's definitely *a* way forward, but I'm not convinced it's a good way
> forward.  Since it's something that I'd expect us to be doing in all
> drivers we'd want to replicate it all over the place which is obviously
> not good, or conversely if there are issues that prevented the code
> being added to the PM core then presumably we're just adding problematic
> code to the driver (you've not mentioned what the problems were with
> doing this in the PM core).

I have posted a patch which adds a runtime PM helper function to the
PM core, I am hoping to get some comments soon.
http://marc.info/?l=linux-pm&m=139228211505423&w=2

So I agree, let's put this patch on hold until we sorted out how to
proceed. Though I will rebase and send a v2 of it, just to keep it as
a reference for later use.

Kind regards
Uffe
--
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/