From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PM] Patrick: which part of "maintainer" and "peer review" needs explaining to you?
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:22:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1061655739.786.3.camel@gaston> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0308221454420.2310-100000@localhost.localdomain>
> > If you want to help, take a look at drivers/pci/power.c. That file
> > should not need to exist, but if I kill it bad stuff happens after
> > resume. Killing pm_register() and friends would be nice.
>
> I'll get there. Give me a couple of weeks..
Actually, on ppc, I have no problem removing that old crap. I suppose
part of the problem Pavel is having is the new code never calling PCI
save_state().
The probleme here is related to the new semantics. save_state() is
indeed meaningless now, but a bunch of drivers implemented sleep in
there because this was really what was called on suspend()... So
unless we want to remove save_state from struct pci_driver and fix all
PCI drivers that implement it, we shall call both save_state() and
suspend() from pci-driver.c suspend routine. (Patch sent separately)
> The decision to kill the level parameter came from extensive discussions
> with Benh, who convinced me that we only need to call ->suspend() once for
> any device; though we still need to somehow provide for those that need to
> power down with interrupts disabled. I suggested -EAGAIN, since it allows
> us to special case those that need it, with the minimum amount of impact.
> Ben agreed with me.
Well... I think I told you I don't like much the check on the interrupt
and tended to prefer either a separate power_down_irq callback or a
parameter, but that would mean changing prototype for drivers... I
agreed we can live with your current scheme though.
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-23 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-22 21:08 [PM] Patrick: which part of "maintainer" and "peer review" needs explaining to you? Pavel Machek
2003-08-22 21:25 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-08-22 21:53 ` Pavel Machek
2003-08-22 22:05 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-08-23 1:03 ` Nigel Cunningham
2003-08-23 16:22 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2003-08-25 19:05 ` [PM] powering down special devices Patrick Mochel
2003-08-25 19:53 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-08-25 9:52 ` [PM] Patrick: which part of "maintainer" and "peer review" needs explaining to you? Pavel Machek
2003-08-22 22:10 ` Pavel Machek
2003-08-22 22:13 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-08-22 22:17 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-08-22 22:36 ` Pavel Machek
2003-08-23 10:47 ` Russell King
2003-08-24 11:54 ` Russell King
2003-08-26 15:39 ` [PM] Config Options Patrick Mochel
2003-08-24 12:08 ` [PM] Patrick: which part of "maintainer" and "peer review" needs explaining to you? Russell King
2003-08-25 15:47 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-08-25 16:27 ` Russell King
2003-08-25 16:57 ` Matt Porter
2003-08-25 17:14 ` Russell King
2003-08-25 17:34 ` Matt Porter
2003-08-28 15:38 ` Platform Devices Patrick Mochel
2003-09-01 12:02 ` [PM] Patrick: which part of "maintainer" and "peer review" needs explaining to you? Pavel Machek
2003-09-02 17:41 ` Jens Axboe
2003-09-09 20:19 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-09-09 20:24 ` Jens Axboe
2003-09-09 21:43 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-09-09 22:54 ` Pavel Machek
2003-09-09 23:07 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-09-09 23:07 ` [PM] Passing suspend level down to drivers Pavel Machek
2003-09-09 23:23 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-09-10 0:06 ` Pavel Machek
2003-09-10 6:12 ` Stephen Rothwell
2003-09-10 11:48 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-09 23:15 ` [PM] Patrick: which part of "maintainer" and "peer review" needs explaining to you? Alan Cox
2003-09-09 22:56 ` Pavel Machek
2003-08-25 17:16 ` Russell King
2003-08-22 22:04 ` Timothy Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1061655739.786.3.camel@gaston \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mochel@osdl.org \
--cc=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).