On Friday, March 14, 2014 6:30 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>
> This patch use SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS macro instead of legacy method.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/devfreq/exynos/exynos4_bus.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/exynos/exynos4_bus.c b/drivers/devfreq/exynos/exynos4_bus.c
> index 60539e8..e5d2c5a 100644
> --- a/drivers/devfreq/exynos/exynos4_bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/devfreq/exynos/exynos4_bus.c
> @@ -1247,6 +1247,7 @@ static int exynos4_busfreq_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
> static int exynos4_busfreq_resume(struct device *dev)
> {
> struct busfreq_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> @@ -1254,9 +1255,10 @@ static int exynos4_busfreq_resume(struct device *dev)
> busfreq_mon_reset(data);
> return 0;
> }
> +#endif
>
> static const struct dev_pm_ops exynos4_busfreq_pm = {
> - .resume = exynos4_busfreq_resume,
> + SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(NULL, exynos4_busfreq_resume)
Hi Chanwoo Choi,
How about using SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS instead of SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS?
SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS is simpler as below.
static SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS(exynos4_busfreq_pm, NULL, exynos4_busfreq_resume);
However, if runtime pm functions will be added later,
SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS is not necessary.
Best regards,
Jingoo Han
> };
>
> static const struct platform_device_id exynos4_busfreq_id[] = {
> --
> 1.8.0
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
