On 04/03/2025 at 12:37, haibo.chen@xxxxxxx wrote: > From: Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@xxxxxxx> > > During system PM, if no wakeup requirement, disable transceiver to > save power. > > Signed-off-by: Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@xxxxxxx>> --- > drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan-core.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan-core.c b/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan-core.c > index b347a1c93536..74f3137295fb 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan-core.c > +++ b/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan-core.c > @@ -2292,6 +2292,7 @@ static int __maybe_unused flexcan_suspend(struct device *device) > return err; > > flexcan_chip_interrupts_disable(dev); > + flexcan_transceiver_disable(priv); flexcan_transceiver_disable() may return an error. Can you check its return value? > err = pinctrl_pm_select_sleep_state(device); > if (err) > @@ -2325,6 +2326,10 @@ static int __maybe_unused flexcan_resume(struct device *device) > if (err) > return err; > > + err = flexcan_transceiver_enable(priv); > + if (err) > + return err; > + > err = flexcan_chip_start(dev); > if (err) > return err; If flexcan_chip_start() fails, shouldn't you have a clean-up branch that will flexcan_transceiver_disable()? Or do you consider that it is acceptable to keep the transceiver enabled if an error occurs? Speaking of which, if flexcan_resume() fails, priv->can.state would still be set to CAN_STATE_ERROR_ACTIVE. Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol
