[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230508133503.GX14287@atomide.com>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2023 16:35:03 +0300
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>, Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/1] serial: core: Start managing serial controllers
to enable runtime PM
* Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> [230508 12:11]:
> On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 02:03:35PM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > We want to enable runtime PM for serial port device drivers in a generic
> > way. To do this, we want to have the serial core layer manage the
> > registered physical serial controller devices.
> >
> > To do this, let's set up a struct bus and struct device for the serial
> > core controller as suggested by Greg and Jiri. The serial core controller
> > devices are children of the physical serial port device. The serial core
> > controller device is needed to support multiple different kind of ports
> > connected to single physical serial port device.
> >
> > Let's also set up a struct device for the serial core port. The serial
> > core port instances are children of the serial core controller device.
> >
> > With the serial core port device we can now flush pending TX on the
> > runtime PM resume as suggested by Johan.
>
> Sorry, I'm on vacation. But just brief comments below.
> In general looks good to me.
OK have a nice vacation :)
> > -obj-$(CONFIG_SERIAL_CORE) += serial_core.o
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_SERIAL_CORE) += serial_base.o
> > +serial_base-objs := serial_core.o serial_base_bus.o serial_ctrl.o serial_port.o
>
> 'objs' is for user space tools, kernel should use 'y'
Oh OK.
> > +static DEFINE_RUNTIME_DEV_PM_OPS(serial_port_pm, NULL,
> > + serial_port_runtime_resume, NULL);
>
> Maybe
>
> static DEFINE_RUNTIME_DEV_PM_OPS(serial_port_pm,
> NULL, serial_port_runtime_resume, NULL);
>
> for better logical split?
Sure.
Thanks,
Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists