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:   Mon, 10 Oct 2016 19:46:10 +0530
From:   Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>
To:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
        Linux USB Mailing List <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] host: ehci-exynos: Convert to use the SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS

hi Alan/Krzysztof,

On 10 October 2016 at 02:47, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Oct 2016, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 02:34:14PM +0000, Anand Moon wrote:
>> > Move the ehci-exynos system PM callbacks within #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>> > as to avoid them being build when not used. This also allows us to use the
>> > SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS macro which simplifies the code.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c | 14 ++++++--------
>> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c
>> > index 42e5b66..1899900 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-exynos.c
>> > @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ static int exynos_ehci_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> >     return 0;
>> >  }
>> >
>> > -#ifdef CONFIG_PM
>> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>>
>> Does not look like an equivalent change. How will it behave in a config
>> with !SUSPEND && !HIBERNATE && PM?
>
> It's hard to say what Anand originally had in mind.  To me, it looks
> like it will behave exactly the same as before, the only difference
> being that the object image will not contain unused exynos_ehci_suspend
> and exynos_ehci_resume routines.  And the compiler won't issue a
> warning at build time that the routines are unused.
>
> Alan Stern
>

Thanks for looking into this closely.

I will just send one line changes to use SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS
with better commit logs, if you people agree with this.

Best Regards
-Anand Moon

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ