lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jul]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/4][update] hwmon / exynos4_tmu: Use struct dev_pm_ops for power management
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 09:48:15PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
>
Hi Rafael,

> Make the Exynos4 TMU driver define its PM callbacks through
> a struct dev_pm_ops object rather than by using legacy PM hooks
> in struct platform_driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> ---
> drivers/hwmon/exynos4_tmu.c | 18 +++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux/drivers/hwmon/exynos4_tmu.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/drivers/hwmon/exynos4_tmu.c
> +++ linux/drivers/hwmon/exynos4_tmu.c
> @@ -476,34 +476,38 @@ static int __devexit exynos4_tmu_remove(
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PM
> -static int exynos4_tmu_suspend(struct platform_device *pdev, pm_message_t state)
> +static int exynos4_tmu_suspend(struct device *dev)
> {
> - exynos4_tmu_control(pdev, false);
> + exynos4_tmu_control(to_platform_device(dev), false);
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int exynos4_tmu_resume(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +static int exynos4_tmu_resume(struct device *dev)
> {
> + struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
> +
> exynos4_tmu_initialize(pdev);
> exynos4_tmu_control(pdev, true);
>
> return 0;
> }
> +
> +static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(exynos4_tmu_pm,
> + exynos4_tmu_suspend, exynos4_tmu_resume);
> +#define EXYNOS4_TMU_PM (&exynos4_tmu_pm)
> #else
> -#define exynos4_tmu_suspend NULL
> -#define exynos4_tmu_resume NULL
> +#define EXYNOS4_TMU_PM NULL
> #endif

Actually, looking into other drivers, the common approach seems to be to declare

static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(exynos4_tmu_pm,
exynos4_tmu_suspend, exynos4_tmu_resume);

outside the #ifdef code and then just assign

.pm = &exynos4_tmu_pm;

unconditionally.

That seems to be a much simpler solution. Any special reason for not
implementing it this way ? Same question applies to the other patches in the
series.

Thanks,
Guenter

>
> static struct platform_driver exynos4_tmu_driver = {
> .driver = {
> .name = "exynos4-tmu",
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .pm = EXYNOS4_TMU_PM,
> },
> .probe = exynos4_tmu_probe,
> .remove = __devexit_p(exynos4_tmu_remove),
> - .suspend = exynos4_tmu_suspend,
> - .resume = exynos4_tmu_resume,
> };
>
> module_platform_driver(exynos4_tmu_driver);
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-07-08 23:01    [W:0.051 / U:0.304 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site