From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 12:18:17 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu: Add system PM support In-Reply-To: References: <71247263f4d88e7776f483fb1cc1139b516c0835.1500381551.git.robin.murphy@arm.com> Message-ID: <20170808111816.GD13355@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 01:44:42PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > With all our hardware state tracked in such a way that we can naturally > restore it as part of the necessary reset, resuming is trivial, and > there's nothing to do on suspend at all. > > Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy > --- > drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c > index 86897b7b81d8..0f5f06e9abfa 100644 > --- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c > +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu.c > @@ -2356,10 +2356,22 @@ static int arm_smmu_device_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > return 0; > } > > +static int __maybe_unused arm_smmu_pm_resume(struct device *dev) > +{ Did you actually get a warning here without the __maybe_unused annotation? It looks like some other drivers just guard the thing with CONFIG_PM_SLEEP. > + struct arm_smmu_device *smmu = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > + > + arm_smmu_device_reset(smmu); > + return 0; > +} > + > + > +static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(arm_smmu_pm_ops, NULL, arm_smmu_pm_resume); > + > static struct platform_driver arm_smmu_driver = { > .driver = { > .name = "arm-smmu", > .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(arm_smmu_of_match), > + .pm = &arm_smmu_pm_ops, Cosmetic: can you tab-align this assignment please? Will