[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140520091526.GF15585@mwanda>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 12:15:26 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mtd: delete unneeded call to platform_get_drvdata
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:35:31AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > > > static int bf5xx_nand_resume(struct platform_device *dev)
> > > > {
> > > > - struct bf5xx_nand_info *info = platform_get_drvdata(dev);
> > > > -
> > > > return 0;
> > >
> > > In this case bf5xx_nand_suspend/resume could be removed?
> >
> > I don't know. It looks like it is intentional to have a definition that
> > returns an indication of success? The complete set of definitions is:
>
> I'm not so sure. I believe suspend/resume works just fine without the
> hooks, if those hooks would otherwise be doing nothing. It is notable
> that this driver is not using the modern dev_pm_ops form of the
> suspend/resume callbacks, so maybe it just hasn't aged gracefully--and
> possibly was never supported properly in the first place.
>
These are called from platform_legacy_suspend/platform_legacy_resume.
It looks like the functions are not needed.
(I am not an expert on pm, I just querried my Smatch Cross Function
Database which is awesome).
regards,
dan carpenter
--
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