linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 3/4] PM / sleep: Go direct

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, 2 Oct 2015 10:40:49 +0200
From:	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:	Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
Cc:	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	martyn.welch@...labora.co.uk,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/4] PM / sleep: Go direct_complete if driver has no callbacks

On 2 October 2015 at 10:10, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com> wrote:
> On 2 October 2015 at 09:48, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
>> On 2 October 2015 at 09:14, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com> wrote:
>>> If a suitable prepare callback cannot be found for a given device and
>>> its driver has no PM callbacks at all, assume that it can go direct to
>>> complete when the system goes to sleep.
>>>
>>> The reason for this is that there's lots of devices in a system that do
>>> no PM at all and there's no reason for them to prevent their ancestors
>>> to do direct_complete if they can support it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Changes in v8:
>>> - Move no_pm_callbacks field into CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>>> - Call device_check_pm_callbacks only after a device is bound or unbound
>>
>> Devices that don't use a driver, will not get this feature for "free".
>> I expect in those cases, they will have to call
>> device_check_pm_callbacks() themselves, right?
>
> You are right, but wonder if we shouldn't go back to calling
> device_check_pm_callbacks() from device_pm_add() and
> dev_pm_domain_set() so they don't have to.

That seems reasonable to me, and I didn't quite understand why you
decided to remove it. :-)

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/