[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4503971.bAhddQ8uqO@pc-42>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 18:14:36 +0100
From: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
driverdevel <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/24] wfx: add bus_sdio.c
Hello Ulf,
On Monday 22 March 2021 13:20:35 CET Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 14:25, Jerome Pouiller
> <Jerome.Pouiller@...abs.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/wireless/silabs/wfx/bus_sdio.c | 259 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 259 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/net/wireless/silabs/wfx/bus_sdio.c
>
> [...]
>
> > +static const struct sdio_device_id wfx_sdio_ids[] = {
> > + { SDIO_DEVICE(SDIO_VENDOR_ID_SILABS, SDIO_DEVICE_ID_SILABS_WF200) },
> > + { },
> > +};
> > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(sdio, wfx_sdio_ids);
> > +
> > +struct sdio_driver wfx_sdio_driver = {
> > + .name = "wfx-sdio",
> > + .id_table = wfx_sdio_ids,
> > + .probe = wfx_sdio_probe,
> > + .remove = wfx_sdio_remove,
> > + .drv = {
> > + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > + .of_match_table = wfx_sdio_of_match,
>
> It's not mandatory to support power management, like system
> suspend/resume. However, as this looks like this is a driver for an
> embedded SDIO device, you probably want this.
>
> If that is the case, please assign the dev_pm_ops here and implement
> the ->suspend|resume() callbacks.
I have no platform to test suspend/resume, so I have only a
theoretical understanding of this subject.
I understanding is that with the current implementation, the
device will be powered off on suspend and then totally reset
(including reloading of the firmware) on resume. I am wrong?
This behavior sounds correct to me. You would expect something
more?
--
Jérôme Pouiller
Powered by blists - more mailing lists