[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190129104613.GC20920@t480s.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:46:13 -0500
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@...tlin.com>,
Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Save switch rules
Hi Miquèl,
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 15:51:57 +0100, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> > Today, there is no S2RAM support for switches. First, I proposed to add
> > suspend/resume callbacks to the mv88e6xxx driver - just enough to avoid
> > crashing the kernel.
>
> Then i would suggest the mv88e6xxx refuses the suspend. Actually that
> probably is the first correct step. We don't have suspend support, so
> stop the suspend happening, so preventing the kernel crash.
I am not confortable with adding support for S2RAM in mv88e6xxx yet because
as it was explained, we are aware of much complicated scenarios out there
to pretend that DSA /partly/ supports suspend-resume. The prefered approach
for the moment is to keep things simple and not supporting this feature yet,
especially at the mv88e6xxx driver level.
However crashing is unacceptable so I'm backing Andrew's point here, please
submit a fix to prevent the suspend (and crash) for the moment.
Sorry if you felt that your work is being delayed, it is much appreciated!
Thanks,
Vivien
Powered by blists - more mailing lists