linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH 1/2] spi: rockchip: Convert to late and early system PM callbacks

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]

Message-ID: <20171013234511.dxazu5wvvz7sjiiu@dtor-ws>
Date:   Fri, 13 Oct 2017 16:45:11 -0700
From:   Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     jeffy <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com>,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 1/2] spi: rockchip: Convert to late and early
 system PM callbacks

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 07:37:50PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:30:06AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 02:19:28AM +0800, jeffy wrote:
> 
> > > > Yeah, it's the same stuff as we get with initcall ordering.  This sort
> > > > of thing does happen with things like PMICs which tend to have hardware
> > > > that the system wants to manipulate in the IRQs off part of suspend.
> > > > Ideally the dependency annotation stuff would figure things out though
> > > > I'm not sure what the status of that is.
> 
> > I'd say non-existent for resources such as regulators, pwms, clocks,
> > etc. I do not think many places call device_link_add()... I think adding
> > this to devm_* APIs might be easiest to get the ball going as they
> > naturally have consumer device and can easily figure out the supplier
> > side.
> 
> Hrm, are things in a state where we're supposed to be doing that?  I've
> not seen anyone even trying which is a bit odd, I'd thought there was
> some core work still ongoing (and it wasn't clear to me if we were going
> to try to do things like use DT/ACPI cross references to figure this
> stuff out).

Not sure, adding Rafael...

-- 
Dmitry