Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:35:23 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [patch] enums to clear suspend-state confusion |
| |
Hi!
> > 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*. > > Can you not also provide a function > > pci_state_for(system_state) > > then most of the drivers don't have to care. It would also be nice
I actually named that function to_pci_state(), but you had same idea.
> to have a driver flag to indicate which devices can simply be > hotunplug/hotreplugged over a suspend and don't need extra duplicate > code.
Hmm, I do not think it is that easy
suspend is: stop hardware
hotunplug is: stop hardware tell user/system it is gone
So it is more like suspend is subset of hotunplug. If coded properly, hotunplug should probably call suspend code, resulting in no duplication.
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/
| |