lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
    Hi!

    > > > If all you need to do is say 'I don't need to do anything' and we have a
    > > > shared function that does that, all we're talking about doing is adding
    > > > to your struct pci_device (or whatever)
    > > >
    > > > .resume = generic_empty_resume;
    > > >
    > > > To me at least, that doesn't look awkward, and says cleanly and clearly
    > > > that you've checked things over and decided you know what's required.
    > >
    > > Actually, I'd like it to be
    > >
    > > .resume = generic_empty_resume; /* Explain, why your driver needs no
    > > resume */
    >
    > Okay, but we can't define an empty .resume(), because, for example, the PCI's
    > generic suspend/resume won't be called.

    PCI drivers should just do .resume = pci_generic_resume, explicitely.

    > In the meantime, I'd like to ask the authors of new drivers to define
    > error-returning .suspend() if they don't intend to define "real" .suspend()
    > and .resume() for now. When we are ready with the conversion, we'll be able
    > to drop the error-returning .suspend()s and clear "pm_safe" for them.

    Yes... please.
    Pavel
    --
    (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
    (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-02-12 22:03    [W:2.954 / U:0.152 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site