[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87let0kp9g.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 09:49:31 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>
Cc: <tglx@...utronix.de>, <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
<alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] irqchip/atmel-aic: remove #ifdef CONFIG_PM
Claudiu,
If you send more than a single patch, please add a cover letter.
On Wed, 06 Jul 2022 08:46:29 +0100,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com> wrote:
>
> Remove #ifdef CONFIG_PM around aic_suspend() function. Coding style
> recommends (at chapter Conditional Compilation) to avoid using
> preprocessor conditional in .c files.
> gc->chip_types->chip.irq_suspend()/gc->chip_types->chip.irq_resume() is
> called in irq_gc_suspend()/irq_gc_resume() which is NULL in case CONFIG_PM
> is not defined. With this gc->chip_types->chip.irq_pm_shutdown is
> populated all the time as it should be as irq_gc_shutdown() is not
> conditioned by CONFIG_PM.
By your very own investigations, aic_suspend() and co are utterly
useless when !PM. And yet you want to *preserve* them, despite being
dead code? What purpose does it serve (other than some blind
compliance to a rule)?
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists