Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 11 Aug 2004 01:10:42 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Fix Device Power Management States |
| |
Hi!
> > I still do not see it... swsusp does not care about logical state of > > device. (Actually manipulating logical state of device might make > > swsusp less transparent). It cares about device not doing DMA (I also > > said "no interrupts", but that is not strictly neccessary: we disable > > interrupts for atomic copy. Device should do no NMIs, through). > > Perhaps it is unncessary to do at a class level, at least at this point. > I think we all agree that we need some sort of stop/start methods for > devices, though. In which, we can add to struct bus_type: > > int (*dev_stop)(struct device *); > int (*dev_start)(struct device *); > > Sound good?
I fail to see why dev_stop(device) is better than suspend(device, PM_PLEASE_QUIESCE_OR_WHATEVER). It has one big advantage: drivers that ignore second argument (most do) will automagically work.
There is no fundamental problem with dev_stop/dev_start, I just fail to see why they need to be separate from suspend/resume. Pavel -- People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |