Message ID | 20240709165410.11507-1-kiryushin@ancud.ru (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Changes Requested |
Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
Headers | show |
Series | [net-next,v3] tg3: Remove residual error handling in tg3_suspend | expand |
Context | Check | Description |
---|---|---|
netdev/tree_selection | success | Clearly marked for net-next |
netdev/apply | success | Patch already applied to net-next-0 |
On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 10:24 PM Nikita Kiryushin <kiryushin@ancud.ru> wrote: > > As of now, tg3_power_down_prepare always ends with success, but > the error handling code from former tg3_set_power_state call is still here. > > This code became unreachable in commit c866b7eac073 ("tg3: Do not use > legacy PCI power management"). > > Remove (now unreachable) error handling code for simplification and change > tg3_power_down_prepare to a void function as its result is no more checked. > > Signed-off-by: Nikita Kiryushin <kiryushin@ancud.ru> > Reviewed-by: Michael Chan <michael.chan@broadcom.com> > --- > Resubmitted tha patch as it was applied to wrong tree and then > reverted in commit 72076fc9fe60 I am not sure I understand this patch, commit d72b735712e65, which is the same patch, is already applied, right?
Right. Last time it was applied to a wrong tree (net instead of net-next) and then reverted because of this. As I understand, it was meant to be re-applied to net-next (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/4726fefd2a710cbee0d1a7fb15e361564915e955.camel@redhat.com/), but it seemed to get lost in process, so I decided to resubmit. On 7/10/24 07:53, Pavan Chebbi wrote: > I am not sure I understand this patch, commit d72b735712e65, which is > the same patch, is already applied, right?
On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 7:03 PM Nikita Kiryushin <kiryushin@ancud.ru> wrote: > > Right. Last time it was applied to a wrong tree (net instead of net-next) and then > reverted because of this. As I understand, it was meant to be re-applied to net-next (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/4726fefd2a710cbee0d1a7fb15e361564915e955.camel@redhat.com/), > but it seemed to get lost in process, so I decided to resubmit. No, I do see the patch in net-next. (net->net-next merge takes care) Please rebase to latest? > > On 7/10/24 07:53, Pavan Chebbi wrote: > > I am not sure I understand this patch, commit d72b735712e65, which is > > the same patch, is already applied, right? >
Thank You! It was an outdated tree on my side, what a shame. Sorry for the confusion. On 7/11/24 07:02, Pavan Chebbi wrote: > No, I do see the patch in net-next. (net->net-next merge takes care) > Please rebase to latest? >
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/tg3.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/tg3.c index 04964bbe08cf..bc36926a57cf 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/tg3.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/tg3.c @@ -4019,7 +4019,7 @@ static int tg3_power_up(struct tg3 *tp) static int tg3_setup_phy(struct tg3 *, bool); -static int tg3_power_down_prepare(struct tg3 *tp) +static void tg3_power_down_prepare(struct tg3 *tp) { u32 misc_host_ctrl; bool device_should_wake, do_low_power; @@ -4263,7 +4263,7 @@ static int tg3_power_down_prepare(struct tg3 *tp) tg3_ape_driver_state_change(tp, RESET_KIND_SHUTDOWN); - return 0; + return; } static void tg3_power_down(struct tg3 *tp) @@ -18090,7 +18090,6 @@ static int tg3_suspend(struct device *device) { struct net_device *dev = dev_get_drvdata(device); struct tg3 *tp = netdev_priv(dev); - int err = 0; rtnl_lock(); @@ -18114,32 +18113,11 @@ static int tg3_suspend(struct device *device) tg3_flag_clear(tp, INIT_COMPLETE); tg3_full_unlock(tp); - err = tg3_power_down_prepare(tp); - if (err) { - int err2; - - tg3_full_lock(tp, 0); - - tg3_flag_set(tp, INIT_COMPLETE); - err2 = tg3_restart_hw(tp, true); - if (err2) - goto out; - - tg3_timer_start(tp); - - netif_device_attach(dev); - tg3_netif_start(tp); - -out: - tg3_full_unlock(tp); - - if (!err2) - tg3_phy_start(tp); - } + tg3_power_down_prepare(tp); unlock: rtnl_unlock(); - return err; + return 0; } static int tg3_resume(struct device *device)