On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 16:09 +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 04:01:02PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 10:48 +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > 1) Notification is sent to a device. Since we know the device that > > > generated the event, we don't need .wakeup_event. BTW, Alan thought we should trust BIOS can handle wakeup event correctly here, so device don't need .wakeup_event. I have no strong objection currently, but from my experience in ACPI side, BIOS is always not able to be trusted. > > > 2) Notification is sent to a bus. This will only happen if the device > > > supports PME, so we don't need .wakeup_event. > > This depends on where you put the ACPI GPE code. If you put it to ACPI directory, then > > we need a .wakeup_event at least in bus level. > > ACPI is a generic framework, it can send wakeup event to any bus. It's > > definitely better to put the wakeup GPE handling into ACPI directory. > > I don't agree - the wakeup GPE will generate a standard notify, and the > notification handler has to be at the device or bus layer to handle > device-specific requests. Then we will have duplicate code at each device or bus. -- 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
