In PM v1, all devices were called at SUSPEND_DISABLE level. Then
all devices were called at SUSPEND_SAVE_STATE level, and finally
SUSPEND_POWER_DOWN level. However, with PM v2, to maintain
compatibility for platform devices, I arranged for the PM v2
suspend/resume callbacks to call the old PM v1 suspend/resume
callbacks three times with each level in order so that existing
drivers continued to work.
Since this is obsolete infrastructure which is no longer necessary,
we can remove it. Here's an (untested) patch to do exactly that.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
There are a number of sparse warnings from the latest sparse
snapshot being generated from the drivers/base build. The
main culprits are due to the initialisation functions not
being declared in a header file.
Also, the firmware.c file should include <linux/device.h>
to get the prototype of firmware_register() and
firmware_unregister().
This patch moves the init function declerations from the
init.c file to the base.h, and ensures it is included in
all the relevant c sources. It also adds <linux/device.h>
to the included headers for firmware.c.
The patch does not solve all the sparse errors generated,
but reduces the count significantly.
drivers/base/core.c:161:1: warning: symbol 'devices_subsys' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/core.c:417:12: warning: symbol 'devices_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/sys.c:253:6: warning: symbol 'sysdev_shutdown' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/sys.c:326:5: warning: symbol 'sysdev_suspend' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/sys.c:428:5: warning: symbol 'sysdev_resume' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/sys.c:450:12: warning: symbol 'system_bus_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/bus.c:133:1: warning: symbol 'bus_subsys' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/bus.c:667:12: warning: symbol 'buses_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/class.c:759:12: warning: symbol 'classes_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/platform.c:313:12: warning: symbol 'platform_bus_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/cpu.c:110:12: warning: symbol 'cpu_dev_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/firmware.c:17:5: warning: symbol 'firmware_register' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/firmware.c:23:6: warning: symbol 'firmware_unregister' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/firmware.c:28:12: warning: symbol 'firmware_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/init.c:28:13: warning: symbol 'driver_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/dmapool.c:174:10: warning: implicit cast from nocast type
drivers/base/attribute_container.c:439:1: warning: symbol 'attribute_container_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/power/runtime.c:76:6: warning: symbol 'dpm_set_power_state' was not declared. Should it be static?
Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Some KernelDoc descriptions are updated to match the current code.
No code changes.
Signed-off-by: Martin Waitz <tali@admingilde.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
platform_add_devices can be used from within modules, so it should be
exported. This can for example happen if you have hotpluggable firmware in
an FPGA on a system on chip processor; in our case the FPGA is probed for
devices and the FPGA base code registers the devices it has found with the
kernel.
(akpm: I think this is reasonable from a licensing POV: it's unlikely that
anyone would be interested in merging such specialised modules into mainline,
and it's a GPL export).
Signed-off-by: Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.
Let it rip!
Russell King