linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Rework pm_ptr() and *_PM

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3xfuFN+0Gb694R_W2tpC7PfFEFcpsAyPdanqZ6FpVoxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Dec 2021 10:22:24 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
Cc:     "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, list@...ndingux.net,
        "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Rework pm_ptr() and *_PM_OPS macros

On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 1:20 AM Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net> wrote:
>
> This patchset reworks the pm_ptr() macro I introduced a few versions
> ago, so that it is not conditionally defined.
>
> It applies the same treatment to the *_PM_OPS macros. Instead of
> modifying the existing ones, which would mean a 2000+ patch bomb, this
> patchset introduce two new macros to replace the now deprecated
> UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS() and SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS().
>
> The point of all of this, is to progressively switch from a code model
> where PM callbacks are all protected behind CONFIG_PM guards, to a code
> model where PM callbacks are always seen by the compiler, but discarded
> if not used.
>
> Patch [4/5] and [5/5] are just examples to illustrate the use of the new
> macros. As such they don't really have to be merged at the same time as
> the rest and can be delayed until a subsystem-wide patchset is proposed.
>
> - Patch [4/5] modifies a driver that already used the pm_ptr() macro,
>   but had to use the __maybe_unused flag to avoid compiler warnings;
> - Patch [5/5] modifies a driver that used a #ifdef CONFIG_PM guard
>   around its suspend/resume functions.

This is fantastic, I love the new naming and it should provide a great path
towards converting all drivers eventually. I've added the patches to
my randconfig test build box to see if something breaks, but otherwise
I think these are ready to get into linux-next, at least patches 1-3,
so subsystem
maintainers can start queuing up the conversion patches once the
initial set is merged.

Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>