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 60577C433F5 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:35:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4955A61164 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:35:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241458AbhIWNgu (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:36:50 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-f42.google.com ([209.85.210.42]:41855 "EHLO mail-ot1-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241451AbhIWNgs (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:36:48 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-f42.google.com with SMTP id 97-20020a9d006a000000b00545420bff9eso8484439ota.8; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 06:35:16 -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=XZZw776AxWux9GflNAqL8Dxi/2W2AZOaGIsTCN23/JI=; b=zSfYErVihtWILD/QzPhxg+FT7es2tdaXKiryb8Q0A8bqZ2/BcXwcQ2RO+8LcdN+RrU 2BEefEh1CRhCc+IjwgSCdA6PUBfDeiG2k6h57m7vpEE98VukbNJ9jMQkkx0Vao/rpcQr xPGRpz50zdtPiQx7ApX8qJrO36nRKOt9VzdHpXtXoET+pcH9egUqrfD71IED8QmMxUeh uxzU8gofJgAfkWqF0XnlEvx58Ue8HUwBiaV4ayAUg9R516qnDT5EOPODIlXhtQBlqowr CqkTkD+CZpYDoa/FhYgVLCREZ36Nf4h7BbbWWA5kpRTPp3X5n2g7TsmdvRGXfrs7/Juq AfxA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531GZH2CxhGygU/PlqV7/KWD3cDzRkSvrgJ2dqNe/W04SbagcuJx h9N7qNmybVTu1OpzUrzd5MQbbOu34qmBqMJ/l1jKQSy9 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxbep/n43sV1q9mnlvRyLJF8PEQI/TRth8de/xmRePf4Td9GNDiDEnxffMIwIJhaUPFtEk7Tf7jg65nb5BKQXw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:165a:: with SMTP id h26mr4489432otr.301.1632404116454; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 06:35:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1800633.tdWV9SEqCh@kreacher> <8879480.rMLUfLXkoz@kreacher> <069444f7-d623-fae2-5cd0-83cbbc919aff@gmail.com> <013e3a7b-ec67-1a67-c2b9-e1fbb11c664e@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <013e3a7b-ec67-1a67-c2b9-e1fbb11c664e@gmail.com> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 15:35:05 +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" , "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 Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 3:26 PM Ferry Toth wrote: > > Hi, > > Op 23-09-2021 om 13:30 schreef Rafael J. Wysocki: > > 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. > > No problem at all. If I can I will try to report back tonight. Else, will be delayed 2 due to a short break. Thank you!