lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Mar]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] PM: define new ASSIGN_*_PM_OPS macros based on assign_if
On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 12:06:33PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > +#define ASSIGN_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(suspend_fn, resume_fn) \
> > > + .suspend = assign_if_pm_sleep(suspend_fn), \
> > > + .resume = assign_if_pm_sleep(resume_fn), \
> > > + .freeze = assign_if_pm_sleep(suspend_fn), \
> > > + .thaw = assign_if_pm_sleep(resume_fn), \
> > > + .poweroff = assign_if_pm_sleep(suspend_fn), \
> > > + .restore = assign_if_pm_sleep(resume_fn),
> >
> > Ugh, what a mess, really? Is it that hard to get the #ifdef right in
> > the code? Why not just always define the functions and then also always
> > have them in the structures, and if the feature isn't enabled, just
> > don't call/use them?
>
> The functions may not compile with CONFIG_PM disabled. (And #ifdefs in
> the code are considered ugly).
>
> > Yes, it would cause a _very_ tiny increase in code size if the option is
> > disabled, but really, does anyone ever disable those options becides on
> > the dreaded 'make randconfig' checkers?
>
> We don't want CONFIG_PM complexity on some embedded systems...

Really, what embedded systems do not want this?

> and it is useful tostart with simple (!PM) system when introducing new
> board.

I'm not saying to disable the option, I'm saying to stop worrying about
saving a few hundred bytes in individual drivers with this crazy #ifdef
and macro mess that no one understands and always gets wrong.

greg k-h


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-03-01 18:01    [W:0.040 / U:28.612 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site