Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 16 Mar 2002 03:51:17 -0500 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] devexit fixes in i82092.c |
| |
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>I wonder if mochel already code for this, or has thought about this... >> Just like suspend, IMO we ideally should use the device tree to >>shutdown the system, agreed? >> > >Ideally we should, yes. Although if we really turn off power, it doesn't >much matter. > It matters to a software engineering wonk like me :) I know it -really- doesn't matter, but from a theoretical perspective, if we are trying to achieve the "everything is hotpluggable" model, poweroff via device tree will naturally fall out from that.
If it makes it easier for some, I consider poweroff not as an act unto itself, but as a transition to state D3cold. :) And since we will eventually be able to handle transition to similar low-power states, we might as well follow similar/the same code paths.
>>Further, I wonder if the reboot/shutdown notifiers can be replaced with >>device tree control over those events... >> > >This is what I want. Those reboot/shutdown notifiers are completely and >utterly buggy, and cannot sanely handle any kind of device hierarchy. > yep
Jeff
- 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/
| |