Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932210AbaK0JUI (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Nov 2014 04:20:08 -0500 Received: from mail-qa0-f42.google.com ([209.85.216.42]:50151 "EHLO mail-qa0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755069AbaK0JUE (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Nov 2014 04:20:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <37310416.jZXoh5nfSC@vostro.rjw.lan> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 10:20:03 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] PM: Use CONFIG_PM instead of CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME in core code From: Ulf Hansson To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux PM list , Linux PCI , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Devel Maling List , Alan Stern , Bjorn Helgaas , Kevin Hilman , Geert Uytterhoeven Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 27 November 2014 at 09:57, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 27 November 2014 at 01:37, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> Hi, >> >> After commit b2b49ccbdd54 "PM: Kconfig: Set PM_RUNTIME if PM_SLEEP is >> selected" (currently in Linux next) CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME is set whenever >> CONFIG_PM is set, so CONFIG_PM can be used in #ifdefs instead of >> CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME which simplifies things in quite a few cases. >> >> For this reason, the following patches modify some core code to use >> CONFIG_PM instead of CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME. >> >> [1/4] Drop a macro which is redundant after the above commit. >> [2/4] Use PM instead of PM_RUNTIME in the core device PM code. >> [3/4] Use PM instead of PM_RUNTIME in the ACPI core. >> [4/4] Use PM instead of PM_RUNTIME in the PCI core. >> >> They build for me for all of the relevant combinations of options (on x86), >> but more testing (on the other architectures) would be welcome. > > I really like the looks of this patchset! > > Noticed that you have applied it for your bleeding edge branch, I > suppose that means you will get some "free" testing in linux-next? > > Anyway, I have tested it for ux500 (including the genpd support for > it, available in linux-next). It works nicely! > > I have also tested the two Kconfig options; CONFIG_PM_SLEEP (which > selects CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME) and for CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME (with > CONFIG_PM_SLEEP unset). > > That brings me to a raise a question; why do we need to keep these two > configurations options? Couldn't we also have CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME to > select CONFIG_PM_SLEEP, that will further simplify things? > I had look at it. Do you think the below approach could work? I guess the questions is if there are some configurations that use CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME but not CONFIG_PM_SLEEP. And if so, should we care? diff --git a/kernel/power/Kconfig b/kernel/power/Kconfig index 6e7708c..425f83a 100644 --- a/kernel/power/Kconfig +++ b/kernel/power/Kconfig @@ -94,7 +94,6 @@ config PM_STD_PARTITION config PM_SLEEP def_bool y depends on SUSPEND || HIBERNATE_CALLBACKS - select PM_RUNTIME config PM_SLEEP_SMP def_bool y @@ -131,21 +130,12 @@ config PM_WAKELOCKS_GC default y config PM_RUNTIME - bool "Run-time PM core functionality" - ---help--- - Enable functionality allowing I/O devices to be put into energy-saving - (low power) states at run time (or autosuspended) after a specified - period of inactivity and woken up in response to a hardware-generated - wake-up event or a driver's request. - - Hardware support is generally required for this functionality to work - and the bus type drivers of the buses the devices are on are - responsible for the actual handling of the autosuspend requests and - wake-up events. + def_bool y + depends on PM_SLEEP config PM def_bool y - depends on PM_SLEEP || PM_RUNTIME + depends on PM_SLEEP Kind regards Uffe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/