From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Albin Tonnerre <albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linux PM List <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Mack <daniel@caiaq.de>
Subject: [PATCH] PM: Add convenience macro to make switching to dev_pm_ops less error-prone
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 22:05:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200908052205.14222.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200908052047.26293.rjw@sisk.pl>
On Wednesday 05 August 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 August 2009, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 09:55:33PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote :
> > > On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 11:36:12AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> > > > In a number of cases, the .suspend, .freeze, .poweroff and .resume,
> > > > .thaw, .restore functions are identical. However, they all need to be
> > > > assigned to avoid regressionsm as the previous code called .suspend
> > > > resp. .resume in all those cases. SIMPLE_PM_OPS allows to deal with
> > > > this case.
> >
> >
> > > I'd much rather have conversions done with a bit more analysis now that
> > > our framework is more flexible and we can have specialized routines for
> > > hibernation and suspend.
> >
> > I still think that even though they can, quite a number of drivers won't
> > /need/ to have different functions for this, but maybe I'm mistaken.
> >
> > > Maybe we should try changing from run-time to build time warning so that
> > > users are not overly concerned with it?
> >
> > I'm not sure that solves the problem. The fact is that even for developers, it's
> > easy to overlook that assiging only the .suspend and .resume fields is probably
> > a mistake.
>
> I agree, so I'm going to take the patch.
>
> I'll add a comment describing what the macro is for, though.
Strictly speaking, I'm going to add the appended patch to the linux-next
branch of the suspend-2.6 tree.
Thanks,
Rafael
---
From: Albin Tonnerre <albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com>
Subject: PM: Add convenience macro to make switching to dev_pm_ops less error-prone
In a number of cases, the .suspend, .freeze, .poweroff and .resume,
.thaw, .restore functions are identical. However, they all need to be
assigned to avoid regressionsm as the previous code called .suspend
resp. .resume in all those cases. SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS helps to deal
with this case.
[rjw: Changed the name of the macro and added the comment explaining its
purpose.]
Signed-off-by: Albin Tonnerre <albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
---
include/linux/pm.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/pm.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/pm.h
+++ linux-2.6/include/linux/pm.h
@@ -184,6 +184,20 @@ struct dev_pm_ops {
int (*restore_noirq)(struct device *dev);
};
+/*
+ * Use this if you want to use the same suspend and resume callbacks for suspend
+ * to RAM and hibernation.
+ */
+#define SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(name, suspend_fn, resume_fn) \
+struct dev_pm_ops name = { \
+ .suspend = suspend_fn, \
+ .resume = resume_fn, \
+ .freeze = suspend_fn, \
+ .thaw = resume_fn, \
+ .poweroff = suspend_fn, \
+ .resume = resume_fn, \
+}
+
/**
* PM_EVENT_ messages
*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-05 20:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-03 16:33 [PATCH V2] au1xmmc: dev_pm_ops conversion Albin Tonnerre
2009-08-03 19:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-04 9:36 ` [PATCH] Add SIMPLE_PM_OPS: make switching to dev_pm_ops less error-prone Albin Tonnerre
2009-08-05 4:55 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2009-08-05 9:37 ` Albin Tonnerre
2009-08-05 18:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-05 20:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2009-08-05 20:17 ` [PATCH] PM: Add convenience macro to " pHilipp Zabel
2009-08-05 20:22 ` Frans Pop
2009-08-05 21:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-06 8:51 ` Daniel Mack
2009-08-06 12:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-08-06 13:10 ` Magnus Damm
2009-08-06 15:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=200908052205.14222.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com \
--cc=daniel@caiaq.de \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/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