Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756374Ab1CMNEq (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Mar 2011 09:04:46 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:54665 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755976Ab1CMNEn (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Mar 2011 09:04:43 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: LKML Subject: [PATCH 9-10/10] Allow subsystems to avoid using sysdevs for defining "core" PM callbacks Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 14:02:47 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.38-rc8+; KDE/4.6.0; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Greg KH , Kay Sievers , Linux PM mailing list , Russell King , Magnus Damm , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mundt References: <201103100131.58206.rjw@sisk.pl> <201103122212.40828.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: <201103122212.40828.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201103131402.48129.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4459 Lines: 88 On Saturday, March 12, 2011, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Hi, > > On Thursday, March 10, 2011, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > There are multiple problems with sysdevs, or struct sys_device objects to > > be precise, that are so annoying that some people have started to think > > of removind them entirely from the kernel. To me, personally, the most > > obvious issue is the way sysdevs are used for defining suspend/resume > > callbacks to be executed with one CPU on-line and interrupts disabled. > > Greg and Kay may tell you more about the other problems with sysdevs. :-) > > > > Some subsystems need to carry out certain operations during suspend after > > we've disabled non-boot CPUs and interrupts have been switched off on the > > only on-line one. Currently, the only way to achieve that is to define > > sysdev suspend/resume callbacks, but this is cumbersome and inefficient. > > Namely, to do that, one has to define a sysdev class providing the callbacks > > and a sysdev actually using them, which is excessively complicated. Moreover, > > the sysdev suspend/resume callbacks take arguments that are not really used > > by the majority of subsystems defining sysdev suspend/resume callbacks > > (or even if they are used, they don't really _need_ to be used, so they > > are simply unnecessary). Of course, if a sysdev is only defined to provide > > suspend/resume (and maybe shutdown) callbacks, there's no real reason why > > it should show up in sysfs. > > > > For this reason, I thought it would be a good idea to provide a simpler > > interface for subsystems to define "very late" suspend callbacks and > > "very early" resume callbacks (and "very late" shutdown callbacks as well) > > without the entire bloat related to sysdevs. The interface is introduced > > by the first of the following patches, while the second patch converts some > > sysdev users related to the x86 architecture to using the new interface. > > > > I believe that call sysdev users who need to define suspend/resume/shutdown > > callbacks may be converted to using the interface provided by the first patch, > > which in turn should allow us to convert the remaining sysdev functionality > > into "normal" struct device interfaces. Still, even if that turns out to be > > too complicated, the bloat reduction resulting from the second patch kind of > > shows that moving at least some sysdev users to a simpler interface (like in > > the first patch) is a good idea anyway. > > > > This is a proof of concept, so the patches have not been tested. Please be > > extrememly careful, because they touch sensitive code, so to speak. In the > > majority of cases the changes are rather straightforward, but there are some > > more interesting cases as well (io_apic.c most importantly). > > Since Greg likes the idea and there haven't been any objections so far, here's > the official submission. The patches have been tested on HP nx6325 and > Toshiba Portege R500. > > Patch [1/8] is regareded as 2.6.38 material, following Greg's advice. The > other patches in the set are regarded as 2.6.39 material. The last one > obviously depends on all of the previous ones. > > [1/8] - Introduce struct syscore_ops for registering operations to be run on > one CPU during suspend/resume/shutdown. > > [2/8] - Convert sysdev users in arch/x86 to using struct syscore_ops. > > [3/8] - Make ACPI use struct syscore_ops for irqrouter_resume(). > > [4/8] - Make timekeeping use struct syscore_ops for suspend/resume. > > [5/8] - Make Intel IOMMU use struct syscore_ops for suspend/resume. > > [6/8] - Make KVM use struct syscore_ops for suspend/resume. > > [7/8] - Make cpufreq use struct syscore_ops for boot CPU suspend/resume. > > [8/8] - Introduce config switch allowing architectures to skip sysdev > suspend/resume/shutdown code. > > If there are no objectsions, I'd like to push these patches through the suspend > tree. A little followup with two ARM-related patches. [9/10] - Make sh drivers use struct syscore_ops for suspend/resume (instead of sysdevs). [10/10] - Use struct syscore_ops for suspend/resume (instead of sysdevs) in core ARM code. Thanks, Rafael -- 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/