Re: [PATCH 2/8] PM: core: Add NS varients of EXPORT[_GPL]_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS and runtime pm equiv

Rafael J. Wysocki
2022-02-28T20:13:48Z

On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 12:39 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 20:37:57 +0100
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Rafael,
> > CC: linux-pm
>
> Oops. Stupid omission on my part, sorry about that!
>
> >
> > On 2/20/2022 7:15 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > >
> > > As more drivers start to use namespaces, we need to have varients of these
> > > useful macros that allow the export to be in a particular namespace.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> > > Cc: Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net>
> > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >
> > I'd rather route this through linux-pm unless you have dependent changes.
>
> Ok.
>
> The kxsd9 patch (4) is dependent on other changes queued for
> the merge window in IIO. If we want to do it through linux-pm I'd
> love it if we can manage to get the ground work in for the coming merge window.
>
> So options are:
>
> 1) This patch alone via linux-pm and I queue the users up for next cycle
> Fine by me but always awkward to have infrastructure with no users.
> 2) First 3 patches via linux-pm so we have a user (scd30) in a low churn
> driver and I'll queue the rest for 5.19. Fine by me as well.
> That goes on cleanly on 5.17-rc1 and there is nothing else in my review
> queue touching that driver.

That would work for me.

> I'm also interested to hear your view on the discussion going on in reply
> to the cover letter. Specifically Paul suggested we 'only' have the
> namespaced versions of these macros.

Well, I'm a bit afraid that providing the namespaced versions only
would slow down the adoption.