[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lm-sensors
Subject:    Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] hwmon: max6639: Fix CONFIG_PM compile option
From:       Mark Brown <broonie () opensource ! wolfsonmicro ! com>
Date:       2012-03-26 10:37:12
Message-ID: 20120326103711.GE3098 () opensource ! wolfsonmicro ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 03:52:38PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 03:45:43PM -0400, Roland Stigge wrote:

> > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM

> > > Looking into other drivers, I think that should be CONFIG_PM_SLEEP

> > Which other drivers did you mean?

> > What about those drivers that all handle it via CONFIG_PM:

> > abituguru.c
> > abituguru3.c
> > exynos4_tmu.c
> > gpio-fan.c
> > jc42.c
> > lm75.c
> > tmp102.c

> Those drivers don't use SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS. I checked several drivers
> which do use SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS, and they all use CONFIG_PM_SLEEP.

It's nothing to do with SET_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS - it's more about
drivers that are following current best practice (which includes using
the SET_ macros).  A modern driver should be using CONFIG_PM_SLEEP for
system sleep operations and CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME for runtime PM operations
since they can be enabled independently.  CONFIG_PM should only control
having dev_pm_ops at all (if you want to bother with the ifdefery).

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]