lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 18/48] mfd: twl4030-power: Register with kernel power-off handler
    Hi!

    > @@ -611,7 +611,7 @@ twl4030_power_configure_resources(const struct twl4030_power_data *pdata)
    > * After a successful execution, TWL shuts down the power to the SoC
    > * and all peripherals connected to it.
    > */
    > -void twl4030_power_off(void)
    > +static void twl4030_power_off(struct power_off_handler_block *this)
    > {
    > int err;
    >
    > @@ -621,6 +621,11 @@ void twl4030_power_off(void)
    > pr_err("TWL4030 Unable to power off\n");
    > }
    >
    > +static struct power_off_handler_block twl4030_power_off_hb = {
    > + .handler = twl4030_power_off,
    > + .priority = POWER_OFF_PRIORITY_LOW,
    > +};
    > +
    > static bool twl4030_power_use_poweroff(const struct twl4030_power_data *pdata,
    > struct device_node *node)
    > {
    > @@ -839,7 +844,9 @@ static int twl4030_power_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
    > }
    >
    > /* Board has to be wired properly to use this feature */
    > - if (twl4030_power_use_poweroff(pdata, node) && !pm_power_off) {
    > + if (twl4030_power_use_poweroff(pdata, node)) {
    > + int ret;
    > +
    > /* Default for SEQ_OFFSYNC is set, lets ensure this */
    > err = twl_i2c_read_u8(TWL_MODULE_PM_MASTER, &val,
    > TWL4030_PM_MASTER_CFG_P123_TRANSITION);
    > @@ -856,7 +863,11 @@ static int twl4030_power_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
    > }
    > }
    >
    > - pm_power_off = twl4030_power_off;
    > + ret = devm_register_power_off_handler(&pdev->dev,
    > + &twl4030_power_off_hb);
    > + if (ret)
    > + dev_warn(&pdev->dev,
    > + "Failed to register power-off handler\n");
    > }
    >

    Could we get rid of the "struct power_off_handler_block" and guarantee
    that register_power_off never fails (or print message from the
    register_power_off...)? That way, your patch would be an cleanup.

    You could then add priorities if they turn out to be really
    neccessary, later...
    Pavel
    --
    (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
    (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2014-11-10 10:21    [W:4.404 / U:0.544 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site