> > BTW. We currently don't use *d_min_p > > and I can't imagine when and why we ever would, > > so it would be fine with me if you simplify by deleting it. > > It was requested by someone. I can imagine that if _SxW > _SxD, a driver can > decide which state to choose on the basis of some policy we don't know of. I think that for the S3 and S4 states, we'll always use the deepest state that the constraints allow while not breaking system wake. I haven't thought much about "device wake" -- ie _PRW in S0. Maybe some non-trivial device specific policy would be useful there some day. Of course the device would have to know the relative latency of the different D-states for such a policy to make a useful. And I guess they can infer that Dx state latency on a class basis... -Len > > Also, the last line of this block comment can be deleted, > > though that was true before this patch also: > > Not sure what you mean here ... > > > acpi_pci_choose_state() block comment can now be updated to delete this line: > > > > * currently we simply return _SxD, if present. > > Yes, I'll do that in a separate patch. > > Thanks, > Rafael > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
