linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PM] powering down special devices
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:05:38 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0308251201310.1157-100000@cherise> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1061655739.786.3.camel@gaston>


> > 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. 

How about a flag in the power struct, which would place the device on a 
completely separate list from the beginning. The drivers should know 
whether a device needs special handling a priori, so we don't even need to 
touch it during the first iteration of the lists.

This would eliminate the need to check in the drivers, have no impact on 
the majority of drivers, and allow us to easily determine whether or not 
the device supports runtime power management. 


	Pat



  reply	other threads:[~2003-08-25 19:00 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         ` Patrick Mochel [this message]
2003-08-25 19:53           ` [PM] powering down special devices 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=Pine.LNX.4.44.0308251201310.1157-100000@cherise \
    --to=mochel@osdl.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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).