[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] enums to clear suspend-state confusion

    > > I can do that... but it will break compilation of every driver in the
    > > tree. I can fix drivers I use and try to fix some more will sed, but
    > > it will be painfull (and pretty big diff, and I'll probably miss some).
    > That's OK - it's just an hour's work. I'd be more concerned about
    > irritating people who are maintaining and using out-of-tree drivers.
    > Can you remind me why we need _any_ of this? "enums to clear suspend-state
    > confusion" sounds like something which is very optional. I'd be opting to
    > go do something else instead ;)

    Okay... currently, we are passing u32 down the drivers. Some pieces
    interpret it as a PCI state, and some pieces interpret it as a system
    state. We really do want system state to go down to the drivers, so
    they can do different thing on reboot vs. just-before-suspend-to-disk

    Now, Patrick has some plans with device power managment and they
    included something bigger being passed down to the drivers. I wanted
    to prepare for those plans.

    I can replace suspend_state_t with enum system_state, but it might
    mean that enum system_state will have to be extended with things like
    RUNTIME_PM_PCI_D0 in future... I guess that's easiest thing to do. It
    solves all the problems we have *now*.

    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
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.021 / U:54.920 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site