[PATCH 1/2] mpc85xx/lbc: modify suspend/resume entry sequence
Scott Wood
scottwood at freescale.com
Tue Nov 3 17:13:48 AEDT 2015
On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 00:09 -0600, Dogra Raghav-B46184 wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
> Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 11:10 AM
> To: Dogra Raghav-B46184 <raghav at freescale.com>
> Cc: Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 <prabhakar at freescale.com>;
> linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mpc85xx/lbc: modify suspend/resume entry sequence
>
> On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 23:31 -0600, Dogra Raghav-B46184 wrote:
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 4:31 AM
> > To: Dogra Raghav-B46184 <raghav at freescale.com>
> > Cc: Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 <prabhakar at freescale.com>;
> > linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mpc85xx/lbc: modify suspend/resume entry
> > sequence
> >
> > On Mon, 2015-11-02 at 00:12 -0600, Dogra Raghav-B46184 wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Raghav Dogra [mailto:raghav at freescale.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 11:55 AM
> > > To: linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org
> > > Cc: Wood Scott-B07421 <scottwood at freescale.com>; Kushwaha
> > > Prabhakar-B32579 < prabhakar at freescale.com>; Dogra Raghav-B46184
> > > <raghav at freescale.com>
> > > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] mpc85xx/lbc: modify suspend/resume entry
> > > sequence
> > >
> > > Modify platform driver suspend/resume to syscore suspend/resume.
> > > This is because p1022ds needs to use localbus when entering the PCIE
> > > resume.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Raghav Dogra <raghav at freescale.com>
> > > ---
> > > arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile | 2 +-
> > > arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_lbc.c
> > > > 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> > > ---
> > > 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile
> > > b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile index f7cb2a1..4c19e614 100644
> > > --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile
> > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/Makefile
> > > @@ -18,9 +18,9 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PPC_PMI) += pmi.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_U3_DART) += dart_iommu.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_MMIO_NVRAM) += mmio_nvram.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_SOC) += fsl_soc.o fsl_mpic_err.o
> > > +obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_LBC) += fsl_lbc.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_PCI) += fsl_pci.o $(fsl-msi-obj-y)
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_PMC) += fsl_pmc.o
> > > -obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_LBC) += fsl_lbc.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_GTM) += fsl_gtm.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_85XX_CACHE_SRAM) += fsl_85xx_l2ctlr.o
> > > fsl_85xx_cache_sram.o
> > > obj-$(CONFIG_SIMPLE_GPIO) += simple_gpio.o
> > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_lbc.c
> > > b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_lbc.c index d631022..332d700 100644
> > > --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_lbc.c
> > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_lbc.c
> > > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
> > > #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > > #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> > > #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> > > +#include <linux/syscore_ops.h>
> > > #include <asm/prom.h>
> > > #include <asm/fsl_lbc.h>
> > >
> > > @@ -354,24 +355,42 @@ err:
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND
> > >
> > > /* save lbc registers */
> > > -static int fsl_lbc_suspend(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > > pm_message_t
> > > state)
> > > +static int fsl_lbc_syscore_suspend(void)
> > > {
> > > - struct fsl_lbc_ctrl *ctrl = dev_get_drvdata(&pdev->dev);
> > > - struct fsl_lbc_regs __iomem *lbc = ctrl->regs;
> > > + struct fsl_lbc_ctrl *ctrl;
> > > + struct fsl_lbc_regs __iomem *lbc;
> > > +
> > > + ctrl = fsl_lbc_ctrl_dev;
> > > + if (!ctrl)
> > > + goto out;
> > > +
> > > + lbc = ctrl->regs;
> > > + if (!lbc)
> > > + goto out;
> > >
> > > ctrl->saved_regs = kmalloc(sizeof(struct fsl_lbc_regs),
> > > GFP_KERNEL);
> > > if (!ctrl->saved_regs)
> > > return -ENOMEM;
> > > [Dogra Raghav-B46184] This is the existing upstream code. Are you
> > > suggesting to modify the upstream code to take care of individual
> > > registers?
> >
> > What specifically do you mean by "the upstream code"? What other tree
> > are we talking about here?
> >
> > -Scott
> >
> > I meant that these two lines of code are not being added or modified
> > by this patch. They already exist in the upstream tree. Are you
> > suggesting I modify them as well?
> > -Raghav
>
> I have no idea which "two lines of code" you're talking about or how any
> comment I made applies to the above diff hunk.
>
> OK, I looked at the original patch and I guess you're talking about the
> _memcpy_fromio() that was *below* your comment? Please configure your
> mailer to quote properly, and put your replies below what you're quoting.
>
> Yes, I think that that usage of _memcpy_fromio() is bad and should be
> changed.
>
> -Scott
>
> Ok, I will take care that the replies are below what I am quoting in
> future.
Also please make your mailer use proper quote markers.
> Can this patch be applied as it is then? The changes you are suggesting can
> come in a new patch.
OK.
-Scott
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list