Re: [PATCH] can: flexcan: disable transceiver during system PM

[Vincent Mailhol]

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