linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] spi: spi-topcliff-pch: use generic power management

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: <CAHp75Vdh-ssrmGgTc=gE9dWLhWDAw7_QHJKFeWKHpO-JqBdsEA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Jul 2020 13:51:49 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhavgupta40@...il.com>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn@...gaas.com>,
        Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhav.varodek@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] spi: spi-topcliff-pch: use generic power management

On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 7:31 PM Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhavgupta40@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Drivers using legacy PM have to manage PCI states and device's PM states
> themselves. They also need to take care of configuration registers.
>
> With improved and powerful support of generic PM, PCI Core takes care of
> above mentioned, device-independent, jobs.
>
> This driver makes use of PCI helper functions like
> pci_save/restore_state(), pci_enable/disable_device(), pci_enable_wake()
> and pci_set_power_state() to do required operations. In generic mode, they
> are no longer needed.
>
> Change function parameter in both .suspend() and .resume() to
> "struct device*" type. Use dev_get_drvdata() to get drv data.

> Compile-tested only.

Yeah...

...

> +static int __maybe_unused pch_spi_suspend(struct device *dev)
>  {
> +       struct pch_pd_dev_save *pd_dev_save = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>
> +       dev_dbg(dev, "%s ENTRY\n", __func__);
>
>         pd_dev_save->board_dat->suspend_sts = true;
>
> +       return 0;
>  }
>
> +static int __maybe_unused pch_spi_resume(struct device *dev)
>  {
> +       struct pch_pd_dev_save *pd_dev_save = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>
> +       dev_dbg(dev, "%s ENTRY\n", __func__);
>

> +       device_wakeup_disable(dev);

Here I left a result. Care to explain (and perhaps send a follow up
fix) where is the counterpart to this call?

> +       /* set suspend status to false */
> +       pd_dev_save->board_dat->suspend_sts = false;

> +       return 0;
>  }


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko