Re: [PATCH 0/5] Rework pm_ptr() and *_PM_OPS macros

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>]

On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 10:22 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 1:20 AM Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net> wrote:
> >
> > This patchset reworks the pm_ptr() macro I introduced a few versions
> > ago, so that it is not conditionally defined.
> >
> > It applies the same treatment to the *_PM_OPS macros. Instead of
> > modifying the existing ones, which would mean a 2000+ patch bomb, this
> > patchset introduce two new macros to replace the now deprecated
> > UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS() and SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS().
> >
> > The point of all of this, is to progressively switch from a code model
> > where PM callbacks are all protected behind CONFIG_PM guards, to a code
> > model where PM callbacks are always seen by the compiler, but discarded
> > if not used.
> >
> > Patch [4/5] and [5/5] are just examples to illustrate the use of the new
> > macros. As such they don't really have to be merged at the same time as
> > the rest and can be delayed until a subsystem-wide patchset is proposed.
> >
> > - Patch [4/5] modifies a driver that already used the pm_ptr() macro,
> >   but had to use the __maybe_unused flag to avoid compiler warnings;
> > - Patch [5/5] modifies a driver that used a #ifdef CONFIG_PM guard
> >   around its suspend/resume functions.
>
> This is fantastic, I love the new naming and it should provide a great path
> towards converting all drivers eventually. I've added the patches to
> my randconfig test build box to see if something breaks, but otherwise
> I think these are ready to get into linux-next, at least patches 1-3,
> so subsystem
> maintainers can start queuing up the conversion patches once the
> initial set is merged.
>
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Patches [0-3/5] applied as 5.17 material.

The mmc patches need ACKs, but I can take them too.