On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 20:31:15 +0100 > Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > Almost none of the platforms using the serial driver even have ACPI so >> > this seems to be an obfuscation of a simple numbering system for a >> > subsystem specific set of definitions that may or may not fit in future. >> >> OK so we need to get away from using the ACPI numbering scheme. > > So whats wrong with 0 1 2 3 ? Mainly what is wrong is the documentation that says that this correlates to the ACPI D-states. But we're working to get a serial driver power aware and need to start to let device drivers go to different power states, and then we need to let the core handle not only state 0 and 3 (as it is using today) but also 1 and 2 (currently not used in the serial core). And if several device drivers shall do that it could be a good idea to have some idea of what the numbers actually mean, roughly atleast. Yours, Linus Walleij -- 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
