MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160321121736.GH8413@pali>
References: <1457740175-8327-1-git-send-email-gabriele.mzt@gmail.com>
	<1458341063-8753-1-git-send-email-gabriele.mzt@gmail.com>
	<20160321121736.GH8413@pali>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:13:34 +0100
Message-ID: <CABFtUbRxqJfd=CruaVnQPMbRo1ZaK=NX8wO7kwRh6pDN4s0t2g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] dell-rbtn: Ignore ACPI notifications if device is suspended
From: Gabriele Mazzotta <gabriele.mzt@gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Pali_Roh=C3=A1r?= <pali.rohar@gmail.com>
Cc: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
        "D. Jared Dominguez" <Jared_Dominguez@dell.com>,
        "platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org" 
	<platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Alex Hung <alex.hung@canonical.com>,
        Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1770
Lines: 54

2016-03-21 13:17 GMT+01:00 Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@gmail.com>:
> On Friday 18 March 2016 23:44:23 Gabriele Mazzotta wrote:
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>> +static void ACPI_SYSTEM_XFACE rbtn_acpi_clear_flag(void *context)
>> +{
>> +     struct rbtn_data *rbtn_data = context;
>> +
>> +     rbtn_data->suspended = false;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int rbtn_suspend(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> +     struct acpi_device *device = to_acpi_device(dev);
>> +     struct rbtn_data *rbtn_data = acpi_driver_data(device);
>> +
>> +     rbtn_data->suspended = true;
>> +
>> +     return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int rbtn_resume(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> +     struct acpi_device *device = to_acpi_device(dev);
>> +     struct rbtn_data *rbtn_data = acpi_driver_data(device);
>> +     acpi_status status;
>> +
>> +     /*
>> +      * Clear the flag only after we received the extra
>> +      * ACPI notification.
>> +      */
>> +     status = acpi_os_execute(OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER,
>> +                      rbtn_acpi_clear_flag, rbtn_data);
>> +     if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
>> +             rbtn_data->suspended = false;
>
> I case when acpi_os_execute success it calls rbtn_acpi_clear_flag,
> right? And that will set suspended to false. When acpi_os_execute fails,
> then it set suspended too to false... Then whole acpi_os_execute doing
> just "barrier" after which suspended flag can be set to false. So I
> think rbtn_acpi_clear_flag function is not needed here.
>
> Cannot you pass NULL or empty function pointer as callback? Or what was
> reason to do that flag clearing at "two places"?

acpi_os_execute doesn't wait for the callback to be executed, so
I can't clear the flag from rbtn_resume.

>> +     return 0;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>
> --
> Pali Rohár
> pali.rohar@gmail.com