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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqJssPABjoRM-XAnuN_Xd2-sHoFifJNrRDdk_ruQ0DRw6A@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 09:30:22 -0600 From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> To: JeffyChen <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com> Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>, Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>, "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v12 4/5] PCI / PM: Add support for the PCIe WAKE# signal for OF On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 7:32 PM, JeffyChen <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com> wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Thanks for your reply. > > On 12/27/2017 07:56 AM, Rob Herring wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > drivers/of/of_pci_irq.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> Please move this to drivers/pci/of.c (or perhaps create pci/of_irq.c). >> >>> > drivers/pci/Makefile | 1 + >>> > drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 10 +++++++ >>> > drivers/pci/pci-of.c | 75 >>> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> We already have drivers/pci/of.c. It's not clear what the difference is >> from the filenames. Either merge with of.c or perhaps of-pm.c. > > > this new file does something similar to the pci-acpi.c and pci-mid.c.. pci-acpi.c has similar things to pci/of.c. The naming is just not consistent. Also, I plan to move the rest of drivers/of/of_pci* to drivers/pci. > and i am agree the naming is not clear, maybe we can rename both of those > files to something like pci-pm-***.c? At least pci-acpi.c is more than just PM functions, so that doesn't make sense. Given that all the ACPI related functions are in 1 file, we should do the same for DT. > > Hi Rafael, do you think this would make sense? > > [...] >>> >+static int __init of_pci_init(void) >>> >+{ >>> >+ if (!acpi_disabled) >>> >+ return 0; >>> >+ >>> >+ pci_set_platform_pm(&of_pci_platform_pm); >> >> I guess no DT based system will override this? > > > i think the !acpi_disabled means acpi been disabled or CONFIG_ACPI is > undefined. > > and pci-acpi.c would only work when we have CONFIG_ACPI. > > but i have no idea about pci-mid.c or would it possible to have more > platform pm ops in the future...maybe we should add some dependency in the > Kconfig? It's probably fine given there are only 2 other implementations so far. Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists