[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
    Rafael J. Wysocki schrieb:
    > I think we can introduce a "pm_safe" flag that will indicate if the driver
    > handles suspend/resume correctly. If we do it, we can flag all of the drivers
    > currently in the tree as "pm_safe" unless we know that they aren't. Next,
    > we can convert the core to fail the suspend for any driver that is not flagged
    > as "pm_safe". But I think that will take time.

    Why a new flag? IMHO it would be both more readable and more efficient
    to create a pm_generic_nosuspend() function which does "return -ENOSYS",
    and set that as the .suspend method on drivers known to break
    suspend/resume. New drivers should either have .suspend and .resume
    methods of their own or set .suspend = pm_generic_nosuspend.

    That way, NULL .suspend/.resume methods retain their current semantics
    ("don't know whether suspend would work, never thought about it"),
    error-returning ones would clearly signal "cannot suspend safely", and
    success-returning ones would equally clearly signal "suspend works ok".
    (Bugs nonwithstanding.)

    There could then be a policy parameter (Kconfig selectable to start)
    to abort suspend when encountering a driver without .suspend/.resume
    methods, or to proceed with a warning message.

    Tilman Schmidt E-Mail:
    Bonn, Germany
    Diese Nachricht besteht zu 100% aus wiederverwerteten Bits.
    Ungeöffnet mindestens haltbar bis: (siehe Rückseite)

    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-02-13 10:47    [W:0.021 / U:9.648 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site