From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com>
To: Li Jun <lijun01@kylinos.cn>
Cc: andy@kernel.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, fourier.thomas@gmail.com,
bhelgaas@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] auxdisplay: arm-charlcd: Use DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS for power management
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 07:04:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aoaFlNcXC8zfS0j5@monoceros> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260820013826.1927061-1-lijun01@kylinos.cn>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1816 bytes --]
hello,
On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 09:38:26AM +0800, Li Jun wrote:
> Replace the manually defined dev_pm_ops structure with the
> DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS macro to simplify the power management code.
> This macro automatically handles CONFIG_PM_SLEEP configuration
> and generates freeze/thaw/poweroff/restore callbacks, reducing
> boilerplate code.
>
> Changes:
> -Replace SIMPLE-DEV-PM-OPS() in v1 v2 with DEFINE_SIMPLE_deV_PM-OPS() for pm.
It only matters a little, but it's DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS().
> -Corrected grammar errors in v1 comment.
The description of changes between different revisions of the seris
should be located after the tripple-dash below to not let it go into git
when applied.
I fail to see what changed for v3, the changelog seems to match that of
v2. Also there is already a v4 before you got any feedback for v3, even
before someone had a chance to give feedback. Maintainer-Opinions differ
about the minimal interval between revisions, but three submissions
within a day is too much for any maintainer I think.
Additionally Andy requested the use of pm_sleep_ptr() which isn't even
in v4.
I think the same is needed for your firmware/arm_scmi patch and also for
the bluetooth one.
The usage of DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() is an improvement, but now you
have (at least) three series in flight and the trivial feedback you
received here applies to all three. As someone who also sends many
patches, I recommend to get up to speed slowly. Work on a single patch
first, and only once you get that in---or at least positive feedback on
it---address one or two further drivers. When you have a handful of
patches in, you can speed up. But as it is now, you only occupy many
people finding the same issues in your patches. :-\
Best regards
Uwe
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-20 5:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-20 1:38 [PATCH v3] auxdisplay: arm-charlcd: Use DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS for power management Li Jun
2026-08-20 5:04 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2026-08-20 6:04 ` lijun
2026-08-20 7:31 ` Uwe Kleine-König
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=aoaFlNcXC8zfS0j5@monoceros \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=fourier.thomas@gmail.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=lijun01@kylinos.cn \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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