[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aCl8F0MA7JXSZYxf@wunner.de>
Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 08:20:07 +0200
From: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
To: Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"open list:RADEON and AMDGPU DRM DRIVERS" <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"open list:HIBERNATION (aka Software Suspend, aka swsusp)" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:PCI SUBSYSTEM" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
AceLan Kao <acelan.kao@...onical.com>,
Kai-Heng Feng <kaihengf@...dia.com>,
Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@...ebb.ca>,
Denis Benato <benato.denis96@...il.com>,
Merthan Karaka?? <m3rthn.k@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] PCI: Put PCIe ports with downstream devices into
D3 at hibernate
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 02:34:05PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> Adjust the pci_pm_poweroff_noirq() to follow the same flow as
> pci_pm_suspend_noirq() in that PCIe ports that are power manageable should
Nit: s/should//
> without downstream devices in D0 should be put into their appropriate
> sleep state.
This leads to a lot of code duplication between pci_pm_suspend_noirq()
and pci_pm_poweroff_noirq(). Can the common portion of the code be moved
to a helper invoked by both functions so that it's easier to follow the
logic and understand common and differing parts of the suspend flow?
Thanks,
Lukas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists