On Sat, 5 Dec 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > * Asynchronous suspend and resume infrastructure. For now, PCI, ACPI and > serio devices are enabled to suspend and resume asynchronously. I really think this is totally and utterly broken. Both from an implementation standpoint _and_ from a pure conceptual one. Why isn't the suspend/resume async stuff just done like the init async stuff? We don't need that crazy per-device flag for initialization, neither do we need drivers "enabling" any async code at all. They just do some things asynchronously, and then at the end of init time we wait for all those async events. So why does suspend/resume need to do crazy sh*t instead? It all looks terminally broken: you force async suspend for all PCI drivers, even when it makes no sense. Rather than let the drivers that already know how to do things like disk spinup asynchronously just do it that way. The "timing" routines are also just crazy. What is the excuse for dpm_show_time() taking both start and stop times, since there is never any valid situation when it shouldn't have that do_gettimgofday(&stop) just before it? IOW - the whole end-time thing should be _inside_ dpm_show_time, rather than being done by the caller. No? In other words - I'm not pulling this crazy thing. You'd better explain why it was done that way, when we already have done the same things better before in different ways. Linus -- 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
