Re: [PATCH] PM: Add helper to mark last busy and autosuspend

[Alan Stern]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2014, Vinod Koul wrote:

> > > > What's the advantage?  Removing a few bytes of source code?  There will 
> > > > no change to the object code.  (Not to mention that your patch didn't 
> > > > actually change _any_ of the places where both routines get called!)
> > > Yes we didnt change users, as we need this for one of our drivers we are
> > > trying to push.
> > 
> > Why do you need it?  Just change your driver to call
> > 
> > 	pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(dev);
> > 	pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(dev);
> > 
> > instead of
> > 
> > 	pm_runtime_last_busy_and_autosuspend(dev);
> > 
> > Or create a subroutine in your driver to do this.
> Well since this is common why not add a helper in framework!

You said this was common, but you didn't change any of the other places
these routines get used.  I asked why and you didn't asnwer; all you
said was that you needed it for one of your drivers.

I then pointed out that you don't need it.  You didn't asnwer.

I asked what advantage this change brings.  You didn't answer.

Alan Stern

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/