Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 29 Jul 2020 18:51:10 +0530
From:   Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhavgupta40@gmail.com>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn@helgaas.com>,
        Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhav.varodek@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Kevin Curtis <kevin.curtis@farsite.co.uk>,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] farsync: use generic power management
Message-ID: <20200729132110.GA605@gmail.com>
References: <20200729101730.GA215923@gmail.com>
 <20200729122954.GA1920458@bjorn-Precision-5520>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200729122954.GA1920458@bjorn-Precision-5520>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 07:29:54AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 03:47:30PM +0530, Vaibhav Gupta wrote:
> >
> > Agreed. Actually, as their presence only causes PCI core to call
> > pci_legacy_suspend/resume() for them, I thought that after removing
> > the binding from "struct pci_driver", this driver qualifies to be
> > grouped under genric framework, so used "use generic power
> > management" for the heading.
> > 
> > I should have written "remove legacy bindning".
> 
> This removed the *mention* of fst_driver.suspend and fst_driver.resume,
> which is important because we want to eventually remove those members
> completely from struct pci_driver.
> 
> But fst_driver.suspend and fst_driver.resume *exist* before and after
> this patch, and they're initialized to zero before and after this
> patch.
> 
> Since they were zero before, and they're still zero after this patch,
> the PCI core doesn't call pci_legacy_suspend/resume().  This patch
> doesn't change that at all.
>
Got it. Thanks :) 
> > But David has applied the patch, should I send a v2 or fix to update
> > message?
> 
> No, I don't think David updates patches after he's applied them.  But
> if the situation comes up again, you'll know how to describe it :)
> 
Thanks a lot. :D

Vaibhav Gupta
> Bjorn