[v2] mtd/mxc_nand: don't call mtd->{suspend,resume} explicitly

The mtd layer is responsible to call mtd->{suspend,resume}.  Doing it
again in the driver is wrong and results in a warning:

	nand_resume called for a chip which is not in suspended state

at resume time.  Removing the calls from the resume and suspend
functions makes them empty allowing them to be deleted completely.

Signed-off-by: Eric Bénard <eric@eukrea.com>
Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
---
v2:
	fix commit log (writen by Uwe Kleine-König)

 drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c |   44 +------------------------------------------
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)

On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 20:59 +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> The mtd layer is responsible to call mtd->{suspend,resume}.  Doing it
> again in the driver is wrong and results in a warning:
> 
> 	nand_resume called for a chip which is not in suspended state
> 
> at resume time.  Removing the calls from the resume and suspend
> functions makes them empty allowing them to be deleted completely.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Bénard <eric@eukrea.com>
> Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>

Pushed to l2-mtd-2.6.git / dunno

Hi Artem,

can you also pick this patch for mxc_nand ?

Thanks
Eric

Le 17/06/2010 20:59, Eric Bénard a écrit :
> The mtd layer is responsible to call mtd->{suspend,resume}.  Doing it
> again in the driver is wrong and results in a warning:
>
> 	nand_resume called for a chip which is not in suspended state
>
> at resume time.  Removing the calls from the resume and suspend
> functions makes them empty allowing them to be deleted completely.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Bénard<eric@eukrea.com>
> Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-König<u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> Cc: Sascha Hauer<s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
> ---
> v2:
> 	fix commit log (writen by Uwe Kleine-König)
>
>   drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c |   44 +------------------------------------------
>   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> index 0d76b16..ad19dc6 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand.c
> @@ -873,53 +873,11 @@ static int __devexit mxcnd_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>   	return 0;
>   }
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> -static int mxcnd_suspend(struct platform_device *pdev, pm_message_t state)
> -{
> -	struct mtd_info *mtd = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> -	struct nand_chip *nand_chip = mtd->priv;
> -	struct mxc_nand_host *host = nand_chip->priv;
> -	int ret = 0;
> -
> -	DEBUG(MTD_DEBUG_LEVEL0, "MXC_ND : NAND suspend\n");
> -
> -	ret = mtd->suspend(mtd);
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * nand_suspend locks the device for exclusive access, so
> -	 * the clock must already be off.
> -	 */
> -	BUG_ON(!ret&&  host->clk_act);
> -
> -	return ret;
> -}
> -
> -static int mxcnd_resume(struct platform_device *pdev)
> -{
> -	struct mtd_info *mtd = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> -	struct nand_chip *nand_chip = mtd->priv;
> -	struct mxc_nand_host *host = nand_chip->priv;
> -	int ret = 0;
> -
> -	DEBUG(MTD_DEBUG_LEVEL0, "MXC_ND : NAND resume\n");
> -
> -	mtd->resume(mtd);
> -
> -	return ret;
> -}
> -
> -#else
> -# define mxcnd_suspend   NULL
> -# define mxcnd_resume    NULL
> -#endif				/* CONFIG_PM */
> -
>   static struct platform_driver mxcnd_driver = {
>   	.driver = {
>   		   .name = DRIVER_NAME,
> -		   },
> +	},
>   	.remove = __devexit_p(mxcnd_remove),
> -	.suspend = mxcnd_suspend,
> -	.resume = mxcnd_resume,
>   };
>
>   static int __init mxc_nd_init(void)

On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 09:24 +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> Hi Artem,
> 
> can you also pick this patch for mxc_nand ?

It is in my tree already, and I sent a notification as well :-)

Hi Artem,

Le 17/07/2010 09:33, Artem Bityutskiy a écrit :
> On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 09:24 +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
>> can you also pick this patch for mxc_nand ?
>
> It is in my tree already, and I sent a notification as well :-)
>

OK, sorry, I didn't see the notification mail and only checked your 
master branch, not the dunno branch where you applied this patch !

Thanks,

Eric

On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 14:49 +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> Hi Artem,
> 
> Le 17/07/2010 09:33, Artem Bityutskiy a écrit :
> > On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 09:24 +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> >> can you also pick this patch for mxc_nand ?
> >
> > It is in my tree already, and I sent a notification as well :-)
> >
> 
> OK, sorry, I didn't see the notification mail and only checked your 
> master branch, not the dunno branch where you applied this patch !

Yeah, I put to master only the stuff I understand and hence, can
sight-off. The rest goes to dunno - David then processes it.