On 24.07.2025 13:41, Mykola Kvach wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 12:32 PM Mykola Kvach <xakep.ama...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 11:32 AM Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 24.06.2025 10:29, Mykola Kvach wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 10:53 AM Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 24.06.2025 09:18, Mykola Kvach wrote:
>>>>>> @@ -281,6 +313,10 @@ static struct uart_driver __read_mostly
>>>>>> scif_uart_driver = {
>>>>>> .start_tx = scif_uart_start_tx,
>>>>>> .stop_tx = scif_uart_stop_tx,
>>>>>> .vuart_info = scif_vuart_info,
>>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSTEM_SUSPEND
>>>>>> + .suspend = scif_uart_suspend,
>>>>>> + .resume = scif_uart_resume,
>>>>>> +#endif
>>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> As this being put inside #ifdef was to be expected, imo a prereq change
>>>>> is to
>>>>> also make the struct fields conditional in xen/console.h. I think I did
>>>>> even
>>>>> comment to this effect back at the time.
>>>>
>>>> Would you prefer that I include this change in the current patch
>>>> series, or is it acceptable to address it in a separate patch?
>>>
>>> Either way is fine with me. I expect the header fine change to be able to go
>>> in right away (once submitted), whereas the patch here may take some time
>>> for
>>> people to review.
>>
>> Got it, I'll submit a separate patch to make the struct fields and
>> related code wrapped within SYSTEM_SUSPEND.
>
> Jan’s proposal to conditionally include the 'suspend' and 'resume' fields
> in 'struct uart_driver' under CONFIG_SYSTEM_SUSPEND has already been
> merged -- thanks!
>
> Could you please take another look at this patch when time permits?
That's an Arm driver, so I don't expect the request was meant to go to me
(as To: having just me was suggesting)?
Jan
