[PATCH] Input: gpio_keys - swtich to dev_pm_ops

[PATCH] Input: gpio_keys - swtich to dev_pm_ops

[Mike Rapoport]

Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <mike@compulab.co.il>
---
 drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys.c |   19 ++++++++++---------
 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys.c
index efed0c9..a3a3b98 100644
--- a/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys.c
+++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys.c
@@ -215,9 +215,9 @@ static int __devexit gpio_keys_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
 }
 
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_PM
-static int gpio_keys_suspend(struct platform_device *pdev, pm_message_t state)
+static int gpio_keys_suspend(struct device *dev)
 {
+	struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
 	struct gpio_keys_platform_data *pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
 	int i;
 
@@ -234,8 +234,9 @@ static int gpio_keys_suspend(struct platform_device *pdev, pm_message_t state)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static int gpio_keys_resume(struct platform_device *pdev)
+static int gpio_keys_resume(struct device *dev)
 {
+	struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
 	struct gpio_keys_platform_data *pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
 	int i;
 
@@ -251,19 +252,19 @@ static int gpio_keys_resume(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
 	return 0;
 }
-#else
-#define gpio_keys_suspend	NULL
-#define gpio_keys_resume	NULL
-#endif
+
+static struct dev_pm_ops gpio_keys_pm_ops = {
+	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
+	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,
+};
 
 static struct platform_driver gpio_keys_device_driver = {
 	.probe		= gpio_keys_probe,
-	.remove		= __devexit_p(gpio_keys_remove),
-	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
 	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,
 	.driver		= {
 		.name	= "gpio-keys",
 		.owner	= THIS_MODULE,
+		.pm	= &gpio_keys_pm_ops,
 	}
 };
 
-- 
1.6.0.6

Re: [PATCH] Input: gpio_keys - swtich to dev_pm_ops

[Dmitry Torokhov]

Hi Mike,

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 04:59:10PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> +
> +static struct dev_pm_ops gpio_keys_pm_ops = {
> +	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
> +	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,
> +};
>  

This is not 100% equivalent conversion since we are now only handling
s2r, not s2d.. My question though is whether we care or not...

>  static struct platform_driver gpio_keys_device_driver = {
>  	.probe		= gpio_keys_probe,
> -	.remove		= __devexit_p(gpio_keys_remove),
> -	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
>  	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,
>  	.driver		= {
>  		.name	= "gpio-keys",
>  		.owner	= THIS_MODULE,
> +		.pm	= &gpio_keys_pm_ops,
>  	}
>  };
>  

-- 
Dmitry

Re: [PATCH] Input: gpio_keys - swtich to dev_pm_ops

[Mike Rapoport]

Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> 
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 04:59:10PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>> +
>> +static struct dev_pm_ops gpio_keys_pm_ops = {
>> +	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
>> +	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,
>> +};
>>  
> 
> This is not 100% equivalent conversion since we are now only handling
> s2r, not s2d.. My question though is whether we care or not...

I doubt that systems that use gpio-keys ever supported s2d...
If you apply it we'll know soon :)

>>  static struct platform_driver gpio_keys_device_driver = {
>>  	.probe		= gpio_keys_probe,
>> -	.remove		= __devexit_p(gpio_keys_remove),
>> -	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
>>  	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,
>>  	.driver		= {
>>  		.name	= "gpio-keys",
>>  		.owner	= THIS_MODULE,
>> +		.pm	= &gpio_keys_pm_ops,
>>  	}
>>  };
>>  
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.

Re: [PATCH] Input: gpio_keys - swtich to dev_pm_ops

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 06:58:03PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> 
> 
> Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi Mike,
> > 
> > On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 04:59:10PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >> +
> >> +static struct dev_pm_ops gpio_keys_pm_ops = {
> >> +	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
> >> +	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,
> >> +};
> >>  
> > 
> > This is not 100% equivalent conversion since we are now only handling
> > s2r, not s2d.. My question though is whether we care or not...
> 
> I doubt that systems that use gpio-keys ever supported s2d...
> If you apply it we'll know soon :)
> 
> >>  static struct platform_driver gpio_keys_device_driver = {
> >>  	.probe		= gpio_keys_probe,
> >> -	.remove		= __devexit_p(gpio_keys_remove),
> >> -	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
> >>  	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,

I don't think you tried compiling this patch ;( We still need the
remove() method and I think we should keep the CONFIG_PM guards.

I will fix locally.

-- 
Dmitry

Re: [PATCH] Input: gpio_keys - swtich to dev_pm_ops

[Mike Rapoport]

Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 06:58:03PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>
>> Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 04:59:10PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>>> +
>>>> +static struct dev_pm_ops gpio_keys_pm_ops = {
>>>> +	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
>>>> +	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,
>>>> +};
>>>>  
>>> This is not 100% equivalent conversion since we are now only handling
>>> s2r, not s2d.. My question though is whether we care or not...
>> I doubt that systems that use gpio-keys ever supported s2d...
>> If you apply it we'll know soon :)
>>
>>>>  static struct platform_driver gpio_keys_device_driver = {
>>>>  	.probe		= gpio_keys_probe,
>>>> -	.remove		= __devexit_p(gpio_keys_remove),
>>>> -	.suspend	= gpio_keys_suspend,
>>>>  	.resume		= gpio_keys_resume,
> 
> I don't think you tried compiling this patch ;( We still need the
> remove() method and I think we should keep the CONFIG_PM guards.

I did, just I have the gpio-keys built-in in my config, so .remove is not called ...

> I will fix locally.
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.