From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752466AbXBIWvf (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Feb 2007 17:51:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752474AbXBIWvf (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Feb 2007 17:51:35 -0500 Received: from nigel.suspend2.net ([203.171.70.205]:49431 "EHLO nigel.suspend2.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752463AbXBIWve (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Feb 2007 17:51:34 -0500 Subject: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management? From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Arjan van de Ven , LKML , pm list In-Reply-To: <200702092344.14984.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <1171058269.1484.64.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <1171059433.8675.195.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1171059968.1484.90.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <200702092344.14984.rjw@sisk.pl> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 09:51:29 +1100 Message-Id: <1171061489.1484.100.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi. On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:44 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, 9 February 2007 23:26, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Hi. > > > > On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:17 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 08:57 +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > > > > > I don't think this is already done (feel free to correct me if I'm > > > > wrong).. > > > > > > > > Can we start to NAK new drivers that don't have proper power management > > > > implemented? There really is no excuse for writing a new driver and not > > > > putting .suspend and .resume methods in anymore, is there? > > > > > > > > > to a large degree, a device driver that doesn't suspend is better than > > > no device driver at all, right? > > > > I'm not sure it is. It only makes more work for everyone else: We have > > to help people figure out what causes their computer to fail to resume > > (which can take quite a while), then get them them complain to driver > > author, and the driver author has to submit patches to fix it. > > > > All of this is avoided if they'll just do it right in the first place. > > > > > now.. if you want to make the core warn about it, that's very fair > > > > That's probably a good idea too, since I'm only suggesting this for new > > drivers. > > I think if CONFIG_PM_DEBUG is set, the core should warn about drivers not > having .suspend or .resume routines. The only problem with that is, not everyone turns on CONFIG_PM_DEBUG. CONFIG_PM instead? Regards, Nigel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nigel Cunningham Subject: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management? Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 09:51:29 +1100 Message-ID: <1171061489.1484.100.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> References: <1171058269.1484.64.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <1171059433.8675.195.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1171059968.1484.90.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <200702092344.14984.rjw@sisk.pl> Reply-To: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200702092344.14984.rjw@sisk.pl> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: pm list , LKML , Arjan van de Ven List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Hi. On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:44 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, 9 February 2007 23:26, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Hi. > > = > > On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:17 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 08:57 +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > = > > > > I don't think this is already done (feel free to correct me if I'm > > > > wrong).. > > > > = > > > > Can we start to NAK new drivers that don't have proper power manage= ment > > > > implemented? There really is no excuse for writing a new driver and= not > > > > putting .suspend and .resume methods in anymore, is there? > > > = > > > = > > > to a large degree, a device driver that doesn't suspend is better than > > > no device driver at all, right? > > = > > I'm not sure it is. It only makes more work for everyone else: We have > > to help people figure out what causes their computer to fail to resume > > (which can take quite a while), then get them them complain to driver > > author, and the driver author has to submit patches to fix it. > > = > > All of this is avoided if they'll just do it right in the first place. > > = > > > now.. if you want to make the core warn about it, that's very fair > > = > > That's probably a good idea too, since I'm only suggesting this for new > > drivers. > = > I think if CONFIG_PM_DEBUG is set, the core should warn about drivers not > having .suspend or .resume routines. The only problem with that is, not everyone turns on CONFIG_PM_DEBUG. CONFIG_PM instead? Regards, Nigel