From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18233C433F5 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 11:30:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2EC2611C6 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 11:30:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240574AbhIWLcL (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Sep 2021 07:32:11 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f45.google.com ([209.85.210.45]:37411 "EHLO mail-ot1-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238930AbhIWLcL (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Sep 2021 07:32:11 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f45.google.com with SMTP id r43-20020a05683044ab00b0054716b40005so1162811otv.4; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 04:30:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mj4OxXI4XfSiJjpB6gp8VGD37CgIAndA8AQf4u3Q5R8=; b=wNePgff2IzH3h/elMnNhEfkl0npvguwXZ6pXYBMgkxM4Il8/j0xFnOcvtcecGtqa21 sYguBQvunlRIxlj1JooLORcqImD1otUmJvGEr7FUi4OWerPIC/44NQzW7t/VJP7UXdTy bMO4pSQWA4sMIEI2FRTP7twEjYMnCRHS22eim4Nf6kVKGzi917wZY6ZH7d94mZtG4yAE Yna6MoO8f+jFI9H6zbhf8zScyNX1b4jfJUU7jGRxnQZFCGgQjZC7tqOwHijqppkUxN+h 70zxtKnIZRl8fdemWwALhc42VUZK+5/rKXORhPYzV8wCZaKWj+/0VndbbG2ov9fgqc1O TaaA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532HKaPJwXPr7wAKPW+cBH12OVAPvPjQbci0YVQEbY5Ah39c13bP TkSpdobulLapx0ZDtQ6n5XsH1dnjw7+FfwSYOud2jLJFWbM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx6nGVkjtwq2y50SADaDVaDXja5cZhtZ7X90J5t0B7RFrK/17KrYhZT3Y2sH1FH6QPqxxeWGYGxQkOZuRhc8eM= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4d93:: with SMTP id u19mr3871082otk.86.1632396639512; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 04:30:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1800633.tdWV9SEqCh@kreacher> <8879480.rMLUfLXkoz@kreacher> <069444f7-d623-fae2-5cd0-83cbbc919aff@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <069444f7-d623-fae2-5cd0-83cbbc919aff@gmail.com> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:30:28 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] PCI: ACPI: PM: Do not use pci_platform_pm_ops for ACPI To: Ferry Toth Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux PCI , Linux ACPI , LKML , Bjorn Helgaas , Andy Shevchenko , Mika Westerberg Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:31 PM Ferry Toth wrote: > > Hi, > Op 20-09-2021 om 21:17 schreef Rafael J. Wysocki: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > > > 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 > > --- > > > > 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.