linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] platform/x86/intel: atomisp2: Replace deprecated UNIVERSAL_DEV_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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 20:15:57 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc: platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] platform/x86/intel: atomisp2: Replace deprecated
 UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS()

On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 06:20:03PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 4/3/24 12:55 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

..

> As mentioned in the description of DEFINE_RUNTIME_DEV_PM_OPS()
> DEFINE_RUNTIME_DEV_PM_OPS() is NOT a 1:1 replacement for
> UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS() specifically it uses pm_runtime_force_suspend() /
> pm_runtime_force_resume() .

Right.

> Specifically pm_runtime_force_suspend() may NOT get set (and in this case
> will not set) needs_force_resume skipping a resume + suspend cycle
> after a system suspend, which is a problem if firmware has touched
> the state of the device during the suspend/resume cycle since the device
> may now actually be left powered on.

I see, thanks for explaining me this. So this driver is kinda very special.
Still the old question, can we get rid altogether of these atomisp "drivers"
in PDx86?

> It seems there is no direct replacement for UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS()
> without a behavior change.

Correct.

..

Btw, have you seen a few cleanup patches against AtomISP v2 by me?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko