[Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH v2] ata: use generic power management

[Vaibhav Gupta]

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 02:30:03PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 7/27/20 12:11 PM, Vaibhav Gupta wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 11:59:05AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On 7/27/20 11:51 AM, Vaibhav Gupta wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 11:42:51AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>>> On 7/27/20 11:40 AM, Vaibhav Gupta wrote:
> > Yes, I agree. Actually with previous drivers, I was able to get help
> > from maintainers and/or supporters for the hardware testing. Is that
> > possible for this patch?
> 
> It might be, you'll have to ask people to help you, very rarely do people
> just test patches unsolicited unless they have some sort of interest in the
> feature.
> 
> This is all part of what it takes to get code upstream. Writing the code
> is just a small part of it, the bigger part is usually getting it tested
> and providing some assurance that you are willing to fix issues when/if
> they come up.
> 
> You might want to consider splitting up the patchset a bit - you could
> have one patch for the generic bits, then one for each chipset. That
> would allow you to at least get some of the work upstream, once tested.
>
I think I can break this patch into one commit per driver. The reason that
all updates got into one single patch is that I made
ata_pci_device_suspend/resume() static and exported just the
ata_pci_device_pm_ops variable. Thus, all the driver using .suspend/.resume()
had to be updated in a single patch.

First I will make changes in drivers/ata/libata-core.c, but won't make any
function static. Thus, each driver can be updated in independent commits
without breaking anything. And then in the last commit, I can hide the
unnecessary .suspend()/.resume() callbacks. This will create patch-series of 55
or 56 patches.

Will this approach work?

Thanks
Vaibhav Gupta
> -- 
> Jens Axboe
>