From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
To: Ferry Toth <fntoth@gmail.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] PCI: ACPI: PM: Do not use pci_platform_pm_ops for ACPI
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:30:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0gpodPPXTagy5gFFf6mp_jCAdc864CE_giaue72ke7UyQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <069444f7-d623-fae2-5cd0-83cbbc919aff@gmail.com>
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:31 PM Ferry Toth <fntoth@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Op 20-09-2021 om 21:17 schreef Rafael J. Wysocki:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >
> > Using struct pci_platform_pm_ops for ACPI adds unnecessary
> > indirection to the interactions between the PCI core and ACPI PM,
> > which is also subject to retpolines.
> >
> > Moreover, it is not particularly clear from the current code that,
> > as far as PCI PM is concerned, "platform" really means just ACPI
> > except for the special casess when Intel MID PCI PM is used or when
> > ACPI support is disabled (through the kernel config or command line,
> > or because there are no usable ACPI tables on the system).
> >
> > To address the above, rework the PCI PM code to invoke ACPI PM
> > functions directly as needed and drop the acpi_pci_platform_pm
> > object that is not necessary any more.
> >
> > Accordingly, update some of the ACPI PM functions in question to do
> > extra checks in case the ACPI support is disabled (which previously
> > was taken care of by avoiding to set the pci_platform_ops pointer
> > in those cases).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > ---
> >
> > v1 -> v2:
> > * Rebase on top of the new [1/7] and move dropping struct
> > pci_platform_pm_ops to a separate patch.
>
> I wanted to test this series on 5.15-rc2 but this patch 2/7 doesn't
> apply (after 1/7 applied). Should I apply this on another tree?
This is on top of
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-acpi/patch/2793105.e9J7NaK4W3@kreacher/
which is not yet in any tree.
Sorry for the confusion.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-23 11:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-20 18:52 [PATCH v2 0/7] PCI: ACPI: Get rid of struct pci_platform_pm_ops and clean up code Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-20 19:16 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] PCI: PM: Do not use pci_platform_pm_ops for Intel MID PM Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-20 19:17 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] PCI: ACPI: PM: Do not use pci_platform_pm_ops for ACPI Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-22 21:30 ` Ferry Toth
2021-09-23 11:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
[not found] ` <013e3a7b-ec67-1a67-c2b9-e1fbb11c664e@gmail.com>
2021-09-23 13:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-23 13:51 ` Ferry Toth
2021-09-23 20:32 ` Ferry Toth
2021-09-24 12:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-24 14:52 ` Ferry Toth
2021-09-24 21:17 ` Ferry Toth
2021-09-27 13:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-29 19:08 ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-09-29 19:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-20 19:17 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] PCI: PM: Drop struct pci_platform_pm_ops Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-20 19:17 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] PCI: PM: Rearrange pci_target_state() Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-20 19:17 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] PCI: PM: Make pci_choose_state() call pci_target_state() Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-20 19:17 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] PCI: PM: Do not call platform_pci_power_manageable() unnecessarily Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-20 19:17 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] PCI: PM: Simplify acpi_pci_power_manageable() Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-28 23:28 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] PCI: ACPI: Get rid of struct pci_platform_pm_ops and clean up code Bjorn Helgaas
2021-09-29 12:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-29 15:07 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-09-29 17:14 ` Ferry Toth
2021-09-29 18:05 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] PCI: PM: Simplify and unify some helper functions Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-29 18:09 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] PCI: PM: Rearrange pci_target_state() Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-29 18:11 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] PCI: PM: Make pci_choose_state() call pci_target_state() Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-29 18:15 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] PCI: PM: Do not call platform_pci_power_manageable() unnecessarily Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-10-03 20:14 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] PCI: PM: Simplify and unify some helper functions Ferry Toth
2021-10-05 11:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAJZ5v0gpodPPXTagy5gFFf6mp_jCAdc864CE_giaue72ke7UyQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=fntoth@gmail.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).