Return-path: Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:57546 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755360AbbBIEt1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Feb 2015 23:49:27 -0500 Message-ID: <54D83C52.9000403@linux.intel.com> (sfid-20150209_054945_532061_4C6FC715) Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 12:49:22 +0800 From: "Fu, Zhonghui" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arend van Spriel CC: brudley@broadcom.com, Franky Lin , meuleman@broadcom.com, Kalle Valo , linville@tuxdriver.com, pieterpg@broadcom.com, hdegoede@redhat.com, wens@csie.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, brcm80211-dev-list@broadcom.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation References: <54C5AA8C.4010005@linux.intel.com> <54D35545.7010600@linux.intel.com> <54D35814.4070503@broadcom.com> In-Reply-To: <54D35814.4070503@broadcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: I have re-sent the patch with the subject "[PATCH v2] brcmfmac: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation" in another mail. If this patch can be accepted, please tell me. Thanks, Zhonghui On 2015/2/5 19:46, Arend van Spriel wrote: > On 02/05/15 12:34, Fu, Zhonghui wrote: >> What comments about the new patch? Can this new patch be accepted? > > Hi Zhonghui > > Last reply from Kalle was that it did not apply to his tree and recommended to use version numbering so "[PATCH V2] ". > >> Thanks, >> Zhonghui >> >> On 2015/1/26 10:46, Fu, Zhonghui wrote: >>> From ff39ed4af9f1c50358fe92ec4c8eaac9db183e00 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: Zhonghui Fu >>> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:13:21 +0800 >>> Subject: [PATCH] brcmfmac: avoid duplicated suspend/resume operation >>> >>> WiFi chip has 2 SDIO functions, and PM core will trigger >>> twice suspend/resume operations for one WiFi chip to do >>> the same things. This patch avoid this case. >>> >>> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel >>> Signed-off-by: Zhonghui Fu >>> --- > And when using version info a change log here is even better. Although admittedly I lost track which version this would be ;-) > > Regards, > Arend > --- >>> drivers/net/wireless/brcm80211/brcmfmac/bcmsdh.c | 17 +++++++++++++++-- >>> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/brcm80211/brcmfmac/bcmsdh.c b/drivers/net/wireless/brcm80211/brcmfmac/bcmsdh.c >>> index 9880dae..618b545 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/brcm80211/brcmfmac/bcmsdh.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/brcm80211/brcmfmac/bcmsdh.c >>> @@ -1139,11 +1139,17 @@ void brcmf_sdio_wowl_config(struct device *dev, bool enabled) >>> static int brcmf_ops_sdio_suspend(struct device *dev) >>> { >>> struct brcmf_bus *bus_if = dev_get_drvdata(dev); >>> - struct brcmf_sdio_dev *sdiodev = bus_if->bus_priv.sdio; >>> + struct brcmf_sdio_dev *sdiodev; >>> mmc_pm_flag_t sdio_flags; >>> + struct sdio_func *func = dev_to_sdio_func(dev); >>> >>> brcmf_dbg(SDIO, "Enter\n"); >>> >>> + if (func->num == 2) >>> + return 0; >>> + >>> + sdiodev = bus_if->bus_priv.sdio; >>> + >>> atomic_set(&sdiodev->suspend, true); >>> >>> if (sdiodev->wowl_enabled) { >>> @@ -1164,9 +1170,16 @@ static int brcmf_ops_sdio_suspend(struct device *dev) >>> static int brcmf_ops_sdio_resume(struct device *dev) >>> { >>> struct brcmf_bus *bus_if = dev_get_drvdata(dev); >>> - struct brcmf_sdio_dev *sdiodev = bus_if->bus_priv.sdio; >>> + struct brcmf_sdio_dev *sdiodev; >>> + struct sdio_func *func = dev_to_sdio_func(dev); >>> >>> brcmf_dbg(SDIO, "Enter\n"); >>> + >>> + if (func->num == 2) >>> + return 0; >>> + >>> + sdiodev = bus_if->bus_priv.sdio; >>> + >>> if (sdiodev->pdata&& sdiodev->pdata->oob_irq_supported) >>> disable_irq_wake(sdiodev->pdata->oob_irq_nr); >>> brcmf_sdio_wd_timer(sdiodev->bus, BRCMF_WD_POLL_MS); >>> -- 1.7.1 >>> >> >