From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2lp0238.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.238]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A28F3140079 for ; Sat, 10 May 2014 03:09:57 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1399655386.15726.438.camel@snotra.buserror.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] powerpc/pm: add api to get suspend state which is STANDBY or MEM From: Scott Wood To: Li Yang Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 12:09:46 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: <1398319908-30166-1-git-send-email-dongsheng.wang@freescale.com> <1398462328.24575.20.camel@snotra.buserror.net> <1398811632.24575.98.camel@snotra.buserror.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Zhao Chenhui , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Dongsheng Wang , =?UTF-8?Q?=E6=AD=A3=E9=9B=84_=E9=87=91?= , linuxppc-dev List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 17:33 +0800, Li Yang wrote: > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 6:47 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 13:53 +0800, Leo Li wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > >> > On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 14:11 +0800, Dongsheng Wang wrote: > >> >> From: Wang Dongsheng > >> >> > >> >> Add set_pm_suspend_state & pm_suspend_state functions to set/get > >> >> suspend state. When system going to sleep or deep sleep, devices > >> >> can get the system suspend state(STANDBY/MEM) through pm_suspend_state > >> >> function and to handle different situations. > >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Wang Dongsheng > >> >> --- > >> >> *v2* > >> >> Move pm api from fsl platform to powerpc general framework. > >> > > >> > What is powerpc-specific about this? > >> > >> Generally I agree with you. But I had the discussion about this topic > >> a while ago with the PM maintainer. He suggestion to go with the > >> platform way. > >> > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/16/505 > > > > If what he meant was whether you could do what this patch does, then you > > can answer him with, "No, because it got nacked as not being platform or > > arch specific." Oh, and you're still using .valid as the hook to set > > the platform state, which is awful -- I think .begin is what you want to > > use. > > I'm not saying the current patch is good for upstream. Actually I did > say that the patch need to be updated for upstream purpose. I don't follow -- this thread is an upstream submission. > > Now, a more legitimate objection to putting it in generic code might be > > that "standby" and "mem" are loosely defined and the knowledge of how a > > driver should react to each is platform specific -- but your patch > > doesn't address that. You still have the driver itself interpret what > > "standby" and "mem" mean. > > > > Yup, we will address it in next batch. Thanks. -Scott