Re: [PATCH 00/20] powerpc: Convert power off logic to pm_power_off

[Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>]

On 01.10.14 16:33, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> wrote:
>> The generic Linux framework to power off the machine is a function pointer
>> called pm_power_off. The trick about this pointer is that device drivers can
>> potentially implement it rather than board files.
>>
>> Today on PowerPC we set pm_power_off to invoke our generic full machine power
>> off logic which then calls ppc_md.power_off to invoke machine specific power
>> off.
>>
>> However, when we want to add a power off GPIO via the "gpio-poweroff" driver,
>> this card house falls apart. That driver only registers itself if pm_power_off
>> is NULL to ensure it doesn't override board specific logic. However, since we
>> always set pm_power_off to the generic power off logic (which will just not
>> power off the machine if no ppc_md.power_off call is implemented), we can't
>> implement power off via the generic GPIO power off driver.
>>
>> To fix this up, let's get rid of the ppc_md.power_off logic and just always use
>> pm_power_off as was intended. Then individual drivers such as the GPIO power off
>> driver can implement power off logic via that function pointer.
>>
>> With this patch set applied and a few patches on top of QEMU that implement a
>> power off GPIO on the virt e500 machine, I can successfully turn off my virtual
>> machine after halt.
> 
> This is touching the same area as last night's
> "[RFC PATCH 00/16] kernel: Add support for poweroff handler call chain"
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/30/575

I agree, and I think your patch set is walking into a reasonable
direction. However, I really think it should convert all users of
pm_power_off - at which point you'll probably get to the same conclusion
that ppc_md.power_off is a bad idea :).

So in a way, this patch set is semantically a prerequisite to the full
conversion you'd probably like to do :).

Also, in your cover letter you describe that some methods power off the
CPU power while others power off the system power. How do you
distinguish between them with a call chain? You probably won't get
around to trigger the system power off callback after the CPU power off
callback ran ;).


Alex