From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754614AbdA3VxF (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:53:05 -0500 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:33391 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754240AbdA3VxD (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:53:03 -0500 Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 22:53:01 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Thierry Reding Cc: Linus Torvalds , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Sebastian Reichel , Guenter Roeck , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] system-power: Add system power and restart framework Message-ID: <20170130215301.GA18997@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20170130171506.3527-1-thierry.reding@gmail.com> <20170130171506.3527-2-thierry.reding@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170130171506.3527-2-thierry.reding@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > +struct system_power_chip; > + > +struct system_power_ops { > + int (*restart)(struct system_power_chip *chip, enum reboot_mode mode, > + char *cmd); > + int (*power_off_prepare)(struct system_power_chip *chip); > + int (*power_off)(struct system_power_chip *chip); > +}; > + > +struct system_power_chip { > + const struct system_power_ops *ops; > + struct list_head list; > + struct device *dev; > +}; Is it useful to have two structures? AFAICT one would do. Do we always have struct device * to work with? IMO we have nothing suitable for example in the ACPI case. Would void * be more suitable? Could you convert someting (acpi?) to the new framework as demonstration? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html