Hi,
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 6:20 AM Kalyan Thota <kalyan_t@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> -static int msm_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
> +static int msm_pm_suspend(struct device *dev)
> {
> - struct drm_device *ddev = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> - struct msm_drm_private *priv = ddev->dev_private;
> - struct msm_mdss *mdss = priv->mdss;
>
nit: remove blank line at the start of this function
> static const struct dev_pm_ops msm_pm_ops = {
> SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(msm_pm_suspend, msm_pm_resume)
> SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(msm_runtime_suspend, msm_runtime_resume, NULL)
> + .prepare = msm_pm_prepare,
> + .complete = msm_pm_complete,
Presumably you will get a compile failure if someone compiles without
CONFIG_PM_SLEEP since msm_pm_prepare() and msm_pm_complete() won't be
defined but you refer to them unconditionally. Probably the best
solution is to just add "__maybe_unused" to your prepare/complete
function and then always define them.
I can't say I've thought through every corner case but at least this
change no longer raises alarm bells in my mind when I look at it. ;-)
If it works for you and nobody else has objections then it seems good
enough and we can always make more improvements later. Feel free to
add my Reviewed-by tag when my nit is fixed and you make sure it
compiles even if CONFIG_PM_SLEEP isn't defined.
-Doug
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
