Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 Feb 2005 14:34:29 +0100 | From | Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <> | Subject | Re: [ide-dev 3/5] generic Power Management for IDE devices |
| |
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 10:03:00 +0000, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote: > On Maw, 2005-02-01 at 23:03, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:41:24 +0100, Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> wrote: > > > Why do you need to have state-machine? During suspend we are running > > > single-threaded, it should be okay to just do the calls directly. > > > Pavel > > > > If we are running single-threaded I also see no reason for state-machine. > > Ben? > > There may be outstanding I/O running at the time of the suspend. You > want to keep everything nicely ordered. The state machine suspend code > looks to me the right answer and is cleaner.
Outstanding I/Os won't be a problem - suspend will be done as one request. Anyway, state machine is not going away. - 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/
| |