From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 06:51:41 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: Build code depending on PM only if PM is set
Message-Id: <20120911065139.GA32585@verge.net.au>
List-Id: <linux-sh.vger.kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 06:49:15PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, July 09, 2012, Magnus Damm wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > On Monday, July 09, 2012, Simon Horman wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 12:15:12AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > >> >
> > >> > There are a few files under arch/arm/mach-shmobile/ whose entire
> > >> > contents depend on CONFIG_PM, but they are compiled even if
> > >> > CONFIG_PM is unset.  It is cleaner to modify the Makefile to
> > >> > avoid building those files entirely for CONFIG_PM unset and
> > >> > remove #ifdef CONFIG_PM directives from them.
> > >> >
> > >> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > >> > ---
> > >> >  arch/arm/mach-shmobile/Makefile              |    4 +++-
> > >> >  arch/arm/mach-shmobile/include/mach/common.h |    4 ++++
> > >> >  arch/arm/mach-shmobile/pm-r8a7740.c          |    3 ---
> > >> >  arch/arm/mach-shmobile/pm-rmobile.c          |    2 --
> > >> >  arch/arm/mach-shmobile/pm-sh7372.c           |    4 ----
> > >> >  5 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > >> >
> > >> > Index: linux/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/Makefile
> > >> > =================================> > >> > --- linux.orig/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/Makefile
> > >> > +++ linux/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/Makefile
> > >> > @@ -37,11 +37,13 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SH7372)       += entry-intc.
> > >> >  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_R8A7740) += entry-intc.o
> > >> >
> > >> >  # PM objects
> > >> > -obj-$(CONFIG_SUSPEND)              += suspend.o
> > >> >  obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_IDLE)             += cpuidle.o
> > >> > +ifeq ($(CONFIG_PM),y)
> > >> > +obj-$(CONFIG_SUSPEND)              += suspend.o
> > >> >  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SHMOBILE)        += pm-rmobile.o
> > >> >  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SH7372)  += pm-sh7372.o sleep-sh7372.o
> > >> >  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_R8A7740) += pm-r8a7740.o
> > >> > +endif
> > >> >  obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_R8A7779) += pm-r8a7779.o
> > >> >
> > >> >  # Board objects
> > >> > Index: linux/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/include/mach/common.h
> > >> > =================================> > >> > --- linux.orig/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/include/mach/common.h
> > >> > +++ linux/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/include/mach/common.h
> > >> > @@ -41,7 +41,11 @@ extern void sh7372_add_early_devices(voi
> > >> >  extern void sh7372_add_standard_devices(void);
> > >> >  extern void sh7372_clock_init(void);
> > >> >  extern void sh7372_pinmux_init(void);
> > >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> > >> >  extern void sh7372_pm_init(void);
> > >> > +#else
> > >> > +static inline void sh7372_pm_init(void) {}
> > >>
> > >> This seems to slightly alter the behaviour in the case where
> > >> CONFIG_PM is not set. I'm unsure if that is a problem or not.
> > >
> > > I don't think it would be a problem, all of those settings are PM-related.
> > >
> > > Magnus, what do you think?
> > 
> > Cleaning up the code is always nice, but I wonder if you take the
> > following into consideration?
> > 
> > CONFIG_CPU_IDLE=y
> > CONFIG_PM=n
> 
> This actually doesn't work (please see below).
> 
> > Also, slightly off topic, but on top of that we have the ARM specific
> > CONFIG_ARM_CPU_SUSPEND which is required to build cpu_resume() in
> > sleep-sh7372.c, and this in turn in needed for CPUIdle or
> > Suspend-to-RAM on sh7372.
> > 
> > It would be nice to simplify all this somehow. From the ARM arch code
> > we do want to use cpu_resume() and cpu_suspend() both from CPUIdle and
> > Suspend-to-RAM - this since the same low level sleep code is used for
> > both cases.
> 
> Yes, please see my fix for the build bug reported by Guennadi.
> cpu_resume() and cpu_suspend() are not available if CONFIG_SUSPEND is unset.

Hi Rafael,

I may have missed something, but it seems that this patch wasn't merged.
Aside from whether it still applies or not, is it still appropriate?
And if so, is it appropriate to go through the linux-pm tree?