2009/5/29 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>: > On Wednesday 27 May 2009, Magnus Damm wrote: >> From: Magnus Damm <damm@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Allow architecture specific data in struct platform_device. >> Platform device data is needed by the runtime pm code. A similar >> struct already exists for struct device. >> >> The architecture specific asm/device.h file needs to provide >> struct pdev_archdata if CONFIG_HAVE_PLATFORM_DEVICE_DATA is set. >> >> Signed-off-by: Magnus Damm <damm@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> >> Optionally we can make use of struct device archdata instead, >> but since the runtime device pm is limited to platform devices >> it makes sense to make this data platform device specific imo. >> >> arch/Kconfig | 3 +++ >> include/linux/platform_device.h | 5 +++++ >> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+) >> >> --- 0001/arch/Kconfig >> +++ work/arch/Kconfig 2009-05-15 14:51:35.000000000 +0900 >> @@ -112,3 +112,6 @@ config HAVE_DMA_API_DEBUG >> >> config HAVE_DEFAULT_NO_SPIN_MUTEXES >> bool >> + >> +config HAVE_PLATFORM_DEVICE_ARCHDATA > > Hmm. Do we really need yet another CONFIG_ option for that? I don't think we need a total of 3 different config options for the platform device pm stuff, but I do think it makes sense to handle the platform archdata separately. Not sure which is the best way though, the #ifdefery is not very pretty. Maybe the best solution is just to drop the Kconfig stuff and add empty structures to all architecture versions of asm/device.h. Any suggestions? Thanks! / magnus _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
