On 23/01/2015 at 17:50:20 +0100, Sylvain Rochet wrote :
> Hello Wenyou,
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 04:17:00PM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote:
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
> > index 691e6db..a1010f0 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c
>
>
> > @@ -145,62 +145,51 @@ extern void at91_slow_clock(void __iomem *pmc, void
> > __iomem *ramc0,
> > void __iomem *ramc1, int memctrl);
> > extern u32 at91_slow_clock_sz;
> >
> > +static void at91_pm_suspend(suspend_state_t state)
> > +{
> (...)
> > + slow_clock(at91_pmc_base, at91_ramc_base[0],
> > + at91_ramc_base[1], pm_data);
> > +}
>
>
> > - if (slow_clock) {
> > - slow_clock(at91_pmc_base, at91_ramc_base[0],
> > - at91_ramc_base[1],
> > - at91_pm_data.memctrl);
> (...)
> > + at91_pm_suspend(state);
>
>
> By doing that you removed the condition "if (slow_clock)".
>
> But slow_clock can still be NULL, see commit d2e4679, there are multiple
> reasons which ends up with a NULL slow_clock.
>
I would fix that by not calling suspend_set_ops(&at91_pm_ops) when
slow_clock is NULL in patch 6 (quick and easy) or copying the whole
at91_pm_sram_init() in at91_pm_init() and handle failures from there.
--
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
