[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <OSBPR01MB229369A87CAC7846EB6BD8A6D8F00@OSBPR01MB2293.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 02:09:31 +0000
From: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
"linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/3] usb: renesas_usbhs: Remove dummy runtime PM callbacks
Hi Wolfram-san,
> From: Wolfram Sang, Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 7:58 AM
<snip>
> > static const struct dev_pm_ops usbhsc_pm_ops = {
> > .suspend = usbhsc_suspend,
> > .resume = usbhsc_resume,
>
> Unrelated to this patch, but I wonder right now: is there a reason not
> to use SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS here? Shimoda-san?
I don't know why because this code is contributed from Morimoto-san.
I'm guessing this code seems to come from sh_eth.c or i2c-sh_mobile.c
and we don't have the SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS macro at 2009.
Morimoto-san contributed this code at 2010, but it seems not to realize
we have such macro.
Anyway, I'll try to use SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS on the renesas_usbhs driver.
Best regards,
Yoshihiro Shimoda
Powered by blists - more mailing lists