From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
To: Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: pm_runtime_early_init() defined but not used, except on SuperH which has its own definition ?
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2024 20:53:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <010ea3a0-929e-4912-ad22-9f0cf5b1a3e2@redhat.com> (raw)
Hi All,
I noticed that drivers/base/power/power.h defines pm_runtime_early_init()
but nothing under drivers/base uses this.
A grep over the entire tree shows that arch/sh/drivers/platform_early.c
does use pm_runtime_early_init() but rather then including
drivers/base/power/power.h it has its own definition / private copy
of both device_pm_init_common() and pm_runtime_early_init() from
drivers/base/power/power.h ???
Also the private copy of pm_runtime_early_init() in
arch/sh/drivers/platform_early.c differs from the unused one
in drivers/base/power/power.h, but only when CONFIG_PM is not set.
When CONFIG_PM is not set then the pm_runtime_early_init() in
arch/sh/drivers/platform_early.c is a no-op, where as the one in
drivers/base/power/power.h still calls device_pm_init_common()
in this case ...
I also wonder if given that pm_runtime_early_init() is not
used with the exception of arch/sh/drivers/platform_early.c
if the dev->power.early_init flag check in
device_pm_init_common() is really necessary ?
On non SuperH the only (1) caller of device_pm_init_common()
is device_pm_init(), so it seems to me that the code to
avoid doing device_pm_init_common() twice is unnecessary.
Actually it seems to me that the entire contents of
device_pm_init_common() can be moved inside device_pm_init()
and the dev->power.early_init can be completely dropped (2).
Regards,
Hans
1) Well pm_runtime_early_init() calls it too, but that itself
is unused and can be removed, removing it is even ok-ish
for SuperH since that has its own copy anyways.
2) With the exception that all of this is still necessary
for SuperH I guess.
next reply other threads:[~2024-03-03 19:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-03 19:53 Hans de Goede [this message]
2024-03-04 10:34 ` pm_runtime_early_init() defined but not used, except on SuperH which has its own definition ? Geert Uytterhoeven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=010ea3a0-929e-4912-ad22-9f0cf5b1a3e2@redhat.com \
--to=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).