Hi,
On Thursday, June 30, 2011, jean.pi...@newoldbits.com wrote:
> From: Jean Pihet <j-pi...@ti.com>
>
> Add the field wakeup_lat_plist_head in the struct dev_pm_info
> and the initialization of the plist in device_pm_init.
>
> This enables the implementation of per-device constraints in
> PM QoS.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jean Pihet <j-pi...@ti.com>
> ---
> drivers/base/power/main.c | 3 +++
> include/linux/pm.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/main.c b/drivers/base/power/main.c
> index aa632020..b1fd96b 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/main.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/main.c
> @@ -96,6 +96,8 @@ void device_pm_add(struct device *dev)
> dev_name(dev->parent));
> list_add_tail(&dev->power.entry, &dpm_list);
> mutex_unlock(&dpm_list_mtx);
> + /* ToDo: call PM QoS to init the per-device wakeup latency constraints
> */
> + plist_head_init(&dev->power.wakeup_lat_plist_head, &dev->power.lock);
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -106,6 +108,7 @@ void device_pm_remove(struct device *dev)
> {
> pr_debug("PM: Removing info for %s:%s\n",
> dev->bus ? dev->bus->name : "No Bus", dev_name(dev));
> + /* ToDo: call PM QoS to de-init the per-device wakeup latency
> constraints */
> complete_all(&dev->power.completion);
> mutex_lock(&dpm_list_mtx);
> list_del_init(&dev->power.entry);
> diff --git a/include/linux/pm.h b/include/linux/pm.h
> index 3160648..35fe682 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pm.h
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
> #define _LINUX_PM_H
>
> #include <linux/list.h>
> +#include <linux/plist.h>
> #include <linux/workqueue.h>
> #include <linux/spinlock.h>
> #include <linux/wait.h>
> @@ -462,6 +463,7 @@ struct dev_pm_info {
> unsigned long accounting_timestamp;
> void *subsys_data; /* Owned by the subsystem. */
> #endif
> + struct plist_head wakeup_lat_plist_head;
> };
Please use a better name. I mean, relly, the type implies that this is a
plist head, so that doesn't need to appear in the field name too. Also,
the name is confusing, because "wakeup" may mean a couple of different things
and it's not entirely clear what "lat" stands for. So, I'd prefer something
like
+ struct plist_head latency_constraints;
or perhaps you can invent something even better.
>
> extern void update_pm_runtime_accounting(struct device *dev);
>
Thanks,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
