From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74CA74A3F23 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2026 09:04:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788858279; cv=none; b=K9Z0uUCDUTcdbB0KJB6/kP97q+W8juy4LPGDhPblB2w/XqlSlgR/6xG1T1uIcCagwS49PBS+aHijy5Fo6Kw6OVw9RKDzTNMbJ9JTJVHyCakgvW09oNnmdSCuTYVQa8UgC+EmuPgRZNbzieGEVyxxlrcDwTwOrZx1vZP5Fx/HPjY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788858279; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nl0TXoKBPlA5zlwPstopqWen+goLxqiQjU57GvWWoCU=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=pssKMYDB2du0N/FFhLOOB0t51Oq7MLQOoZ0QNyEHiqGCg4INkgJ9nl9EF/KOqVPuuDS9WYcV7WoDB0wb4sdprg+dMONGHzQOXOF7umotTeQu22se59tyHrfbvTyExD3CC8mu7y1rs5EbtImq3UkT4GnD+Slo2r90PzJO5TFcjlY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=jXTo7dds; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="jXTo7dds" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 20D9F1F00A3A; Tue, 8 Sep 2026 09:04:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788858276; bh=eBcJE46qpGOaQ5YTi/ar0FSLNCcMkg5PRiwG1QACxsA=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=jXTo7ddsbX07a6PkdlLnLf0Po/zzUb1B1CsuevTZyQT0/bLAFdT8K8ClPlsBtp3tc 4FiJOxG+r8vQAT0F+V8MGhwBsWd6usxe3ug2Lf0B0aWJfXFn0HmsoSS5RU9vOez1d6 vFHHX74MBWgQqXBYTV+aXtn166iq0PGODSTNM2qmy7RWE2IhAqhF51l/fjwlOk9Ni4 GMLPT4XwM+Z5CuGO6v+5Qz8X796d0mvRqmjP0Ob7VU3AlBJtIFzLwIjqhGbr6Jf/7n 20kUGhqLfLOAUNDKEUVtYsuw4etRZtXRDewM3xJqerGF7DYQW2Rqt81+C3JfZZLgya a6sV0FY/GwCPg== Message-ID: Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 18:04:32 +0900 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ata: ahci_da850: switch to DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS To: Niklas Cassel Cc: Li Jun , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org References: <20260908061025.3580261-1-lijun01@kylinos.cn> From: Damien Le Moal Content-Language: en-US Organization: Western Digital Research In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 9/8/26 17:45, Niklas Cassel wrote: > On Tue, Sep 08, 2026 at 03:13:49PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> On 9/8/26 15:10, Li Jun wrote: >>> Replace the deprecated SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS macro with the recommended >>> DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS. Use pm_ptr(&ahci_da850_pm_ops) to complete >>> the API migration and allow the structure to be correctly dropped >>> when CONFIG_PM=n. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Li Jun >>> Reviewed-by: Damien Le Moal >>> --- >>> changelogs: >>> -add pm_ptr for ahci_da850_pm_ops in ahci_da850_driver. >>> -revise grammar and alignment issues. >>> --- >>> drivers/ata/ahci_da850.c | 6 +++--- >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/ahci_da850.c b/drivers/ata/ahci_da850.c >>> index 4e53ff96d712..469cf015bbf0 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/ata/ahci_da850.c >>> +++ b/drivers/ata/ahci_da850.c >>> @@ -218,8 +218,8 @@ static int ahci_da850_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>> return rc; >>> } >>> >>> -static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(ahci_da850_pm_ops, ahci_platform_suspend, >>> - ahci_platform_resume); >>> +static DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(ahci_da850_pm_ops, ahci_platform_suspend, >>> + ahci_platform_resume); >> >> You resent the same v3... Did you mean to send a fixed v4? Or is it me for some >> reason getting the same patch email twice? > > I just received a single v2 and a single v3. Indeed, I missed v3 in the email subject. > > The commit log is different from v2 and v3, and your Review-tag was picked > up. However, the indentation still looks wrong. It seems to have 8 tabs > instead of 4. And yes, the indentation is still wrong. Maybe fix it when applying? > > > Kind regards, > Niklas -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research