Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] PCI: ACPI: PM: Do not use pci_platform_pm_ops for ACPI

[Ferry Toth]

Repost (with formatting removed, sorry for the noise)
Op 23-09-2021 om 13:30 schreef Rafael J. Wysocki:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:31 PM Ferry Toth<fntoth@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Op 20-09-2021 om 21:17 schreef Rafael J. Wysocki:
> > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki<rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Using struct pci_platform_pm_ops for ACPI adds unnecessary
> > > indirection to the interactions between the PCI core and ACPI PM,
> > > which is also subject to retpolines.
> > >
> > > Moreover, it is not particularly clear from the current code that,
> > > as far as PCI PM is concerned, "platform" really means just ACPI
> > > except for the special casess when Intel MID PCI PM is used or when
> > > ACPI support is disabled (through the kernel config or command line,
> > > or because there are no usable ACPI tables on the system).
> > >
> > > To address the above, rework the PCI PM code to invoke ACPI PM
> > > functions directly as needed and drop the acpi_pci_platform_pm
> > > object that is not necessary any more.
> > >
> > > Accordingly, update some of the ACPI PM functions in question to do
> > > extra checks in case the ACPI support is disabled (which previously
> > > was taken care of by avoiding to set the pci_platform_ops pointer
> > > in those cases).
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki<rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > v1 -> v2:
> > >       * Rebase on top of the new [1/7] and move dropping struct
> > >         pci_platform_pm_ops to a separate patch.
> > I wanted to test this series on 5.15-rc2 but this patch 2/7 doesn't
> > apply (after 1/7 applied). Should I apply this on another tree?
> This is on top of
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-acpi/patch/2793105.e9J7NaK4W3@kreacher/
> which is not yet in any tree.
>
> Sorry for the confusion.
No problem at all. If I can I will try to report back tonight. Else, 
will be delayed 2 due to a short break.