Re: [PATCH] usb: host: xhci: Move suspend ops under PM_SLEEP to avoidwarning

[Santosh Shilimkar]

On Friday 13 December 2013 12:23 AM, David Cohen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 07:25:55PM -0800, David Cohen wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 09:01:04PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>> On Thursday 12 December 2013 08:51 PM, David Cohen wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 08:06:24PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>>>> Otherwise you get below build warnings
>>>>>
>>>>> drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c:201:12: warning: âxhci_plat_suspendâ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>>>>> drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c:209:12: warning: âxhci_plat_resumeâ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c |    4 ++--
>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c
>>>>> index d9c169f..4875be5 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c
>>>>> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ static int xhci_plat_remove(struct platform_device *dev)
>>>>>  	return 0;
>>>>>  }
>>>>>  
>>>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_PM
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>>>>
>>>> Can't you just remove these #ifdefs altogether?
>>>> xhci_plat_pm_ops is set using SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS() macro which
>>>> already handles '#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP' case.
>>>>
>>> It does handle the difference but the hooks implemented would
>>> show-up un-used warning if you remove the #ifdefs.
>>>
>>> drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c:200:12: warning: âxhci_plat_suspendâ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>>> drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c:208:12: warning: âxhci_plat_resumeâ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>>>
>>> So you need to wrap them under the PM_SLEEP check.
>>
>> Yeah... it's not smart enought :)
>> But you could still remove the #else condition and the ugly DEV_PM_OPS
>> macro.
> 
> Since this patch is not urgent, I sent a RFC proposing smarter
> SET_*_PM_OPS(). I included your patch (a bit different) here:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/3337961/
> 
Thats fine by me if you can get your RFC through.

Regards,
Santosh

--
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/