From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, grant.likely@secretlab.ca
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM / Platform: Remove __weak definitions of runtime PM callbacks
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:29:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201104070729.45484.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zko3dn4b.fsf@ti.com>
On Thursday, April 07, 2011, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Hi Rafael, Magnus,
>
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> writes:
>
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> >
> > Remove the __weak definitions of platform bus type runtime PM
> > callbacks, make platform_dev_pm_ops point to the generic routines
> > as appropriate and allow architectures using platform_dev_pm_ops to
> > replace the runtime PM callbacks in that structure with their own
> > set.
> >
> > Convert architectures providing its own definitions of the platform
> > runtime PM callbacks to use the new mechanism.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
>
> I dont't think we should be adding yet another new interface for setting
> platform-specific runtime PM ops.
>
> We now have 3. Two existing ones:
>
> 1) new device power domains (presumably preferred)
> 2) platform_bus_set_pm_ops() (disliked by many)
Hmm, I wasn't aware of that one, will have a look.
> and now the new one you create here
>
> 3) platform_set_runtime_pm_ops()
>
> This new one is basically the same as platform_bus_set_pm_ops(), but
> targetted only at runtime PM ops, and also has all the same problems
> that have been discussed before. Namely, it overrides the pm ops for
> *every* device on the platform_bus, instead of targetting only specific
> devices.
This is not a problem for this particular use case. We really want to
replace the PM ops for all of the platform devices on that platform.
Though I agree it probably makes more sense to use the existing
platform_bus_set_pm_ops() for this purpose.
> With the new device power domains, we can target specific devices.
>
> Wouldn't the right way to go here be to convert mach-shmobile over to
> using device power domains?
Not for this particular purpose.
> The patch below against v2.6.39-rc2 combined with your patch (minus the
> mach-shmobile/* changes) should do it.
Unfortunately it would conflict with work in progress introducing _real_
power domains on shmobile.
Thanks,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-07 5:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-26 23:58 [RFC][PATCH] PM / Platform: Remove __weak definitions of runtime PM callbacks Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-03-28 11:05 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM / Platform: Remove __weak definitions of runtime Magnus Damm
2011-03-28 19:43 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM / Platform: Remove __weak definitions of runtime PM callbacks Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-05 7:17 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM / Platform: Remove __weak definitions of runtime Magnus Damm
2011-04-06 4:24 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM / Platform: Remove __weak definitions of runtime PM callbacks Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-03-29 3:13 ` Paul Mundt
2011-04-06 22:35 ` Kevin Hilman
2011-04-07 5:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2011-04-07 5:48 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM / Platform: Remove __weak definitions of runtime Grant Likely
2011-04-07 6:15 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM / Platform: Remove __weak definitions of runtime PM callbacks Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-07 7:09 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM / Platform: Remove __weak definitions of runtime Grant Likely
2011-04-07 5:44 ` Grant Likely
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=201104070729.45484.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
/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).