From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>
Cc: 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: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:52:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030825095232.GD3020@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0308221454420.2310-100000@localhost.localdomain>
Hi!
> > > Secondly, you can actually remove the second command line parameter
> > > ("noresume") by simply specifying a NULL partition to this parameter. It
> > > requires about a 5-line change, and makes things simpler.
> >
> > You'd better not. You are expected to have one "resume=/foo/bar"
> > specified as append in lilo. You want to able to say noresume and do
> > one boot without resuming. Turning resume with
> > "resume=/dev/nonexistent" would be playing roulete with command line
> > argument order.
>
> AFAIK, you could have
>
> resume=/dev/hda3 always appended to your command line. Should you suspend
> and not want to resume, you should be able to manually add
>
> "resume=" on the command line after the above, and have the setup function
> called again, which would reset it to NULL, thereby keeping the same
I'm not sure if it is easy to guarantee that you are adding *after*
parameters automatically appended with LILO.
> > > -EAGAIN allows the drivers/devices that really need special care to
> > > specify it. Otherwise, we'll end up calling ->suspend() twice for power
> > > down for each device (those that can do w/ interrupts enabled and those
> > > that need interrupts disabled), which also requires every single driver to
> > > check whether or not interrupts are enabled, instead of just those that
> > > need it.
> >
> > No, you should have simply let it alone and pass "level" parameter
> > telling driver if interrupts were disabled or not. No need to
> > constantly change API while trying to stabilise the code.
>
> ...and modify each driver to check for it?
Well, those drivers should have the checks already, otherwise they are
buggy, but I guess I see your point now.
Pavel
--
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-25 9:52 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
2003-08-25 19:05 ` [PM] powering down special devices Patrick Mochel
2003-08-25 19:53 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-08-25 9:52 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2003-08-22 22:10 ` [PM] Patrick: which part of "maintainer" and "peer review" needs explaining to you? 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=20030825095232.GD3020@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mochel@osdl.org \
--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).