netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: phy: improve PM handling of PHY/MDIO

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20180605.085043.798715271428225911.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Tue, 05 Jun 2018 08:50:43 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     hkallweit1@...il.com
Cc:     andrew@...n.ch, f.fainelli@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: phy: improve PM handling of PHY/MDIO

From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2018 22:33:36 +0200

> Current implementation of MDIO bus PM ops doesn't actually implement
> bus-specific PM ops but just calls PM ops defined on a device level
> what doesn't seem to be fully in line with the core PM model.
> 
> When looking e.g. at __device_suspend() the PM core looks for PM ops
> of a device in a specific order:
> 1. device PM domain
> 2. device type
> 3. device class
> 4. device bus
> 
> I think it has good reason that there's no PM ops on device level.
> The situation can be improved by modeling PHY's as device type of
> a MDIO device. If for some other type of MDIO device PM ops are
> needed, it could be modeled as struct device_type as well.

Series applied, thanks.