Re: [PATCH RFC v1 4/7] net: phy: suspend unused PHYs on mdio_busin late_initcall

[Sebastian Hesselbarth]

On 11/20/2013 09:58 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 2013/11/20 Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > Since phy_attach ensures PHYs are resumed, we can now suspend all
> > PHYs that have no attached netdev after initcalls.
>
> I do like the idea, but I think you might want to make sure that the
> MDIO bus suspend policy was set to "auto" (which is the default afair)
> not to expose unexpected behavior.

Ok, TBH I haven't looked through all of phy internals. If we are fine
with the overall approach, I could use some guidance in the individual
patches and policies.

> > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Cc: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > ---
> >   drivers/net/phy/mdio_bus.c |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/mdio_bus.c b/drivers/net/phy/mdio_bus.c
> > index 5617876..10eba58 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/phy/mdio_bus.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/mdio_bus.c
> > @@ -320,6 +320,33 @@ static int mdio_bus_match(struct device *dev, struct device_driver *drv)
> >                  (phydev->phy_id & phydrv->phy_id_mask));
> >   }
> >
> > +static int mdio_bus_suspend_unused(struct device *busdev, void *data)
> > +{
> > +       struct mii_bus *bus = to_mii_bus(busdev);
> > +       struct phy_device *phydev;
> > +       struct phy_driver *phydrv;
> > +       int i;
> > +
> > +       for (i = 0; i < PHY_MAX_ADDR; i++) {
> > +               if (!bus->phy_map[i])
> > +                       continue;
> > +
> > +               phydev = to_phy_device(&bus->phy_map[i]->dev);
> > +               phydrv = to_phy_driver(phydev->dev.driver);
> > +               if (!phydev->attached_dev && phydrv && phydrv->suspend)
> > +                       phy_suspend(phydev);
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       return 0;
>
> You might want to reuse mdio_bus_phy_may_suspend() here to have a
> central place checking for phydev->attached_dev and phydrv->suspend
> just in case we need to add more callbacks in the future or implicit
> PHY state machine hooks. That might also take care of my concern
> expressed above.

Unfortunately, mdio_bus_phy_may_suspend() doesn't help here. It will
correctly tell that unconnected PHYs may_suspend but also that PHYs
connected to PM aware drivers may_suspend.

I tried it and it will also suspend the PHY taken by mv643xx_eth.

But actually, as phy_suspend/resume check for phydrv->suspend
themselves, we can just call it on !phydev->attached_dev and remove
the additional checks.

> > +}
> > +
> > +static int mdio_bus_class_suspend_unused(void)
> > +{
> > +       return class_for_each_device(&mdio_bus_class, NULL, NULL,
> > +                                    mdio_bus_suspend_unused);
> > +}
> > +late_initcall_sync(mdio_bus_class_suspend_unused);
> > +
> >   #ifdef CONFIG_PM
> >
> >   static bool mdio_bus_phy_may_suspend(struct phy_device *phydev)
> > --
> > 1.7.2.5
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/