From: Mason <slash.tmp@free.fr>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>,
linux-pm <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Sebastian Frias <sf84@laposte.net>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] thermal: tango: add resume support
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 11:48:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5795E07F.6010506@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4062048.3qHsMMf8fO@wuerfel>
On 25/07/2016 10:52, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday, July 25, 2016 10:18:22 AM CEST Mason wrote:
>
>> Moving the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS macro outside the CONFIG_PM_SLEEP guard
>> would unconditionally define a struct dev_pm_ops, which just wastes
>> space when CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is undefined (if I'm not mistaken).
>>
>> That's why I put SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS inside the CONFIG_PM_SLEEP guard.
>
> If you want to avoid the extra few bytes, just use the trick I
> suggested:
>
> .pm = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) ? &tango_thermal_pm : NULL,
This would achieve the same result as the solution I proposed
in my v2 patch, right?
So you're saying you prefer the IS_ENABLED macro over using
#ifdef ... #else define stuff as NULL #endif
Did I get that right?
Eduardo, Zhang, what do thermal maintainers prefer?
> You should basically never have that #ifdef inside of the
> platform_driver definition.
Except when the fields don't exist, like the bug I introduced
in struct smp_operations (which you fixed).
Regards.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: slash.tmp@free.fr (Mason)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] thermal: tango: add resume support
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 11:48:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5795E07F.6010506@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4062048.3qHsMMf8fO@wuerfel>
On 25/07/2016 10:52, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday, July 25, 2016 10:18:22 AM CEST Mason wrote:
>
>> Moving the SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS macro outside the CONFIG_PM_SLEEP guard
>> would unconditionally define a struct dev_pm_ops, which just wastes
>> space when CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is undefined (if I'm not mistaken).
>>
>> That's why I put SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS inside the CONFIG_PM_SLEEP guard.
>
> If you want to avoid the extra few bytes, just use the trick I
> suggested:
>
> .pm = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PM_SLEEP) ? &tango_thermal_pm : NULL,
This would achieve the same result as the solution I proposed
in my v2 patch, right?
So you're saying you prefer the IS_ENABLED macro over using
#ifdef ... #else define stuff as NULL #endif
Did I get that right?
Eduardo, Zhang, what do thermal maintainers prefer?
> You should basically never have that #ifdef inside of the
> platform_driver definition.
Except when the fields don't exist, like the bug I introduced
in struct smp_operations (which you fixed).
Regards.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-25 9:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-28 11:37 [RESEND PATCH v2] thermal: tango: add resume support Mason
2016-06-28 11:37 ` Mason
2016-07-18 9:33 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-18 9:33 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-18 10:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-07-18 10:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-07-18 10:13 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-18 10:13 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-18 11:10 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-07-18 11:10 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-07-18 11:28 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-18 11:28 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-18 12:21 ` [PATCH v3] " Mason
2016-07-18 12:21 ` Mason
2016-07-20 10:50 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-20 10:50 ` Thierry Reding
2016-07-22 22:00 ` Kevin Hilman
2016-07-22 22:00 ` Kevin Hilman
2016-07-25 8:18 ` Mason
2016-07-25 8:18 ` Mason
2016-07-25 8:52 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-07-25 8:52 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-07-25 9:48 ` Mason [this message]
2016-07-25 9:48 ` Mason
2016-07-26 12:13 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-07-26 12:13 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-08-19 11:29 ` Zhang Rui
2016-08-19 11:29 ` Zhang Rui
2016-08-22 21:00 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-08-22 21:00 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-08-24 8:25 ` Zhang Rui
2016-08-24 8:25 ` Zhang Rui
2016-08-24 8:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-08-24 8:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-08-24 15:12 ` Mason
2016-08-24 15:12 ` Mason
2016-09-02 13:17 ` [PATCH v4] " Marc Gonzalez
2016-09-02 13:17 ` Marc Gonzalez
2016-09-02 20:54 ` Kevin Hilman
2016-09-02 20:54 ` Kevin Hilman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5795E07F.6010506@free.fr \
--to=slash.tmp@free.fr \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=edubezval@gmail.com \
--cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=sf84@laposte.net \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.