From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI / PM: Only set power states of devices that are power manageable
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 07:43:48 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51F6FE34.2020703@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3386345.rYEkrXssx8@vostro.rjw.lan>
On 07/30/2013 06:21 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, July 29, 2013 10:09:53 PM Aaron Lu wrote:
>> On 07/27/2013 09:10 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>>
>>> Make acpi_device_set_power() check if the given device is power
>>> manageable before checking if the given power state is valid for that
>>> device. Otherwise it will print that "Device does not support" that
>>> power state into the kernel log, which may not make sense for some
>>> power states (D0 and D3cold are supported by all devices by
>>> definition).
>>
>> It will not print "Device does not support" that power state if that
>> power state is D0 or D3cold since we have unconditionally set those two
>> power state's valid flag.
>
> So you didn't actually looked at acpi_bus_get_power_flags() that set the
> power.states[].flags.valid flag, because If you had looked at it, you would
> have seen that that's not the case.
>
> No, we don't set the valid flag for devices that aren't power manageable
> (i.e. have flags.power_manageable unset), which is the *whole* *point* of
> this change.
Right, I missed this. Sorry for the noise.
>
>> OTOH, what value should we return for a device node that is not power
>> manageable in acpi_device_set_power when the target state is D0 or D3
>> cold? The old behavior is to return 0, meanning success without taking
>> any actual action.
>>
>> In acpi_bus_set_power, if the device is not power manageable, we will
>> return -ENODEV; in acpi_dev_pm_full/low_power, we will return 0 as in
>> the original acpi_device_set_power. So return -EINVAL here is correct?
>
> No, the original acpi_device_set_power() will return -ENODEV then, but
> in my opinion returning -EINVAL is more accurate, because "power
> manageable" means "you can change power state of it".
Shall I prepare a patch to update the errno in acpi_bus_set_power?
Thanks,
Aaron
>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
>
>
>>> Tested-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/acpi/device_pm.c | 3 ++-
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
>>> +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
>>> @@ -159,7 +159,8 @@ int acpi_device_set_power(struct acpi_de
>>> int result = 0;
>>> bool cut_power = false;
>>>
>>> - if (!device || (state < ACPI_STATE_D0) || (state > ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD))
>>> + if (!device || !device->flags.power_manageable
>>> + || (state < ACPI_STATE_D0) || (state > ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD))
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>
>>> /* Make sure this is a valid target state */
>>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-29 23:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-27 13:09 [PATCH 0/3] ACPI / PM: Device PM cleanups Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-27 13:10 ` [PATCH 1/3] ACPI / PM: Only set power states of devices that are power manageable Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-29 14:09 ` Aaron Lu
2013-07-29 22:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-29 23:43 ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2013-07-30 14:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-31 6:48 ` Aaron Lu
2013-07-31 10:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-27 13:11 ` [PATCH 2/3] ACPI / PM: Make messages in acpi_device_set_power() print device names Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-29 2:29 ` Aaron Lu
2013-07-29 12:20 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-31 6:52 ` Aaron Lu
2013-07-31 10:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-01 0:49 ` [PATCH updated] ACPI / PM: Add state information in error message for acpi_device_set_power Aaron Lu
2013-07-29 3:06 ` [PATCH 2/3] ACPI / PM: Make messages in acpi_device_set_power() print device names Lan Tianyu
2013-07-29 3:11 ` Joe Perches
2013-07-29 12:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-29 12:16 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-07-29 13:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-29 14:15 ` Aaron Lu
2013-07-29 12:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-27 13:14 ` [PATCH 3/3] ACPI / PM: Use ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD instead of ACPI_STATE_D3 everywhere Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-07-29 14:28 ` Aaron Lu
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=51F6FE34.2020703@intel.com \
--to=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).