| Message ID | 1372209221-16492-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 26/06/13 04:13, Yijing Wang wrote: > Pci core has been saved pm cap register offset by pdev->pm_cap in pci_pm_init() > in init path. So we can use pdev->pm_cap instead of using > pci_find_capability(pdev, PCI_CAP_ID_PM) for better performance and simplified code. > > Signed-off-by: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com> > Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> > Cc: Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> > Cc: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> > Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > --- > drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c b/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c > index 92bda58..f7091ec 100644 > --- a/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c > +++ b/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c > @@ -2805,7 +2805,7 @@ static void radeonfb_early_resume(void *data) > void radeonfb_pm_init(struct radeonfb_info *rinfo, int dynclk, int ignore_devlist, int force_sleep) > { > /* Find PM registers in config space if any*/ > - rinfo->pm_reg = pci_find_capability(rinfo->pdev, PCI_CAP_ID_PM); > + rinfo->pm_reg = rinfo->pdev->pm_cap; > > /* Enable/Disable dynamic clocks: TODO add sysfs access */ > if (rinfo->family == CHIP_FAMILY_RS480) I couldn't find the rest of this series, and I'm not familiar with PCI. So: is this patch and "aty128fb: use pdev->pm_cap instead of pci_find_capability(..,PCI_CAP_ID_PM)" safe to apply for fbdev-3.11 without anything else? I.e. has the PCI core changes been merged in 3.10 or ealier? Tomi
On 2013/6/26 21:15, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 26/06/13 04:13, Yijing Wang wrote: >> Pci core has been saved pm cap register offset by pdev->pm_cap in pci_pm_init() >> in init path. So we can use pdev->pm_cap instead of using >> pci_find_capability(pdev, PCI_CAP_ID_PM) for better performance and simplified code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com> >> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> >> Cc: Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> >> Cc: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> >> Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> --- >> drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c | 2 +- >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c b/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c >> index 92bda58..f7091ec 100644 >> --- a/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c >> +++ b/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c >> @@ -2805,7 +2805,7 @@ static void radeonfb_early_resume(void *data) >> void radeonfb_pm_init(struct radeonfb_info *rinfo, int dynclk, int ignore_devlist, int force_sleep) >> { >> /* Find PM registers in config space if any*/ >> - rinfo->pm_reg = pci_find_capability(rinfo->pdev, PCI_CAP_ID_PM); >> + rinfo->pm_reg = rinfo->pdev->pm_cap; >> >> /* Enable/Disable dynamic clocks: TODO add sysfs access */ >> if (rinfo->family == CHIP_FAMILY_RS480) > > I couldn't find the rest of this series, and I'm not familiar with PCI. > So: is this patch and "aty128fb: use pdev->pm_cap instead of > pci_find_capability(..,PCI_CAP_ID_PM)" safe to apply for fbdev-3.11 > without anything else? I.e. has the PCI core changes been merged in 3.10 > or ealier? Hi Tomi, Thanks for your reply. Yes, it's safe, because PCI core has been use pdev->pm_cap to save the pm capability offset already. And PCI core changes related this pm init code has been merged long long ago(since year 2008). This series changes just to simplifier driver code about pm code. It's not necessary to access pci device register to get pm cap again, drivers can use pci device pm_cap member. and this series had no changes in PCI core. The rest of this series like for bnx2, bnx2x etc has been tested and accepted by other subsystems. link: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2739861/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2739761/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2739771/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2739801/ Thanks! Yijing > > Tomi > >
On 27/06/13 04:51, Yijing Wang wrote: > On 2013/6/26 21:15, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: >> I couldn't find the rest of this series, and I'm not familiar with PCI. >> So: is this patch and "aty128fb: use pdev->pm_cap instead of >> pci_find_capability(..,PCI_CAP_ID_PM)" safe to apply for fbdev-3.11 >> without anything else? I.e. has the PCI core changes been merged in 3.10 >> or ealier? > > Hi Tomi, > Thanks for your reply. Yes, it's safe, because PCI core has been use pdev->pm_cap to save > the pm capability offset already. And PCI core changes related this pm init code has been merged > long long ago(since year 2008). This series changes just to simplifier driver code about pm code. > It's not necessary to access pci device register to get pm cap again, drivers can use pci device pm_cap > member. and this series had no changes in PCI core. The rest of this series like for bnx2, bnx2x etc has > been tested and accepted by other subsystems. Ok, thanks. I'll apply the two patches to my fbdev-3.11 branch. Tomi
On 2013/6/27 14:34, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 27/06/13 04:51, Yijing Wang wrote: >> On 2013/6/26 21:15, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > >>> I couldn't find the rest of this series, and I'm not familiar with PCI. >>> So: is this patch and "aty128fb: use pdev->pm_cap instead of >>> pci_find_capability(..,PCI_CAP_ID_PM)" safe to apply for fbdev-3.11 >>> without anything else? I.e. has the PCI core changes been merged in 3.10 >>> or ealier? >> >> Hi Tomi, >> Thanks for your reply. Yes, it's safe, because PCI core has been use pdev->pm_cap to save >> the pm capability offset already. And PCI core changes related this pm init code has been merged >> long long ago(since year 2008). This series changes just to simplifier driver code about pm code. >> It's not necessary to access pci device register to get pm cap again, drivers can use pci device pm_cap >> member. and this series had no changes in PCI core. The rest of this series like for bnx2, bnx2x etc has >> been tested and accepted by other subsystems. > > Ok, thanks. I'll apply the two patches to my fbdev-3.11 branch. > > Tomi > > Thanks very much!
diff --git a/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c b/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c index 92bda58..f7091ec 100644 --- a/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c +++ b/drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c @@ -2805,7 +2805,7 @@ static void radeonfb_early_resume(void *data) void radeonfb_pm_init(struct radeonfb_info *rinfo, int dynclk, int ignore_devlist, int force_sleep) { /* Find PM registers in config space if any*/ - rinfo->pm_reg = pci_find_capability(rinfo->pdev, PCI_CAP_ID_PM); + rinfo->pm_reg = rinfo->pdev->pm_cap; /* Enable/Disable dynamic clocks: TODO add sysfs access */ if (rinfo->family == CHIP_FAMILY_RS480)
Pci core has been saved pm cap register offset by pdev->pm_cap in pci_pm_init() in init path. So we can use pdev->pm_cap instead of using pci_find_capability(pdev, PCI_CAP_ID_PM) for better performance and simplified code. Signed-off-by: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> Cc: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> Cc: linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- drivers/video/aty/radeon_pm.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)