[RFC 1/2] PM / suspend: Add platform_suspend_target_state()
From: f.fainelli@gmail.com (Florian Fainelli)
Date: 2017-07-12 18:08:29
Also in:
linux-pm, lkml
On 06/29/2017 04:00 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Thursday, June 22, 2017 06:08:36 PM Florian Fainelli wrote:quoted
Add an optional platform_suspend_ops callback: target_state, and a helper function globally visible to get this called: platform_suspend_target_state(). This is useful for platform specific drivers that may need to take a slightly different suspend/resume path based on the system's suspend/resume state being entered. Although this callback is optional and documented as such, it requires a platform_suspend_ops::begin callback to be implemented in order to provide an accurate suspend/resume state within the driver that implements this platform_suspend_ops. Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> --- include/linux/suspend.h | 12 ++++++++++++ kernel/power/suspend.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+)diff --git a/include/linux/suspend.h b/include/linux/suspend.h index d9718378a8be..d998a04a90a2 100644 --- a/include/linux/suspend.h +++ b/include/linux/suspend.h@@ -172,6 +172,15 @@ static inline void dpm_save_failed_step(enum suspend_stat_step step) * Called by the PM core if the suspending of devices fails. * This callback is optional and should only be implemented by platforms * which require special recovery actions in that situation. + * + * @target_state: Returns the suspend state the suspend_ops will be entering. + * Called by device drivers that need to know the platform specific suspend + * state the system is about to enter. + * This callback is optional and should only be implemented by platforms + * which require special handling of power management states within + * drivers. It does require @begin to be implemented to provide the suspend + * state. Return value is platform_suspend_ops specific, and may be a 1:1 + * mapping to suspend_state_t when relevant. */ struct platform_suspend_ops { int (*valid)(suspend_state_t state);@@ -184,6 +193,7 @@ struct platform_suspend_ops { bool (*suspend_again)(void); void (*end)(void); void (*recover)(void); + int (*target_state)(void);I would use unsigned int (the sign should not matter).quoted
};That's almost what I was thinking about except that the values returned by ->target_state should be unique, so it would be good to do something to ensure that. The concern is as follows. Say you have a driver develped for platform X where ->target_state returns A for "mem" and B for "standby". Then, the same IP is re-used on platform Y returning B for "mem" and C for "standby" and now the driver cannot distinguish between them. Moreover, even if they both returned A for "mem" there might be differences in how "mem" was defined by each of them and therefore in what the driver was expected to do to handle "mem" on X and Y.
That makes sense, would you need the core implementation in platform_suspend_target_state() to range check what suspend_ops->target_state() returns against a set of reserved value say, checking from 0 up to ACPI_S_STATE_COUNT or is there another range you would like to see being used? Thanks! -- Florian