On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 02:56:43PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> To make it clear that the symbol in question refers to >> suspend-to-idle, rename it from PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE to >> PM_SUSPEND_S2IDLE. >> >> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/acpi/sleep.c | 2 - >> drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c | 2 - >> include/linux/suspend.h | 4 +-- >> kernel/power/suspend.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------- >> kernel/power/suspend_test.c | 4 +-- >> 5 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) >> >> Index: linux-pm/include/linux/suspend.h >> =================================================================== >> --- linux-pm.orig/include/linux/suspend.h >> +++ linux-pm/include/linux/suspend.h >> @@ -33,10 +33,10 @@ static inline void pm_restore_console(vo >> typedef int __bitwise suspend_state_t; >> >> #define PM_SUSPEND_ON ((__force suspend_state_t) 0) >> -#define PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE ((__force suspend_state_t) 1) >> +#define PM_SUSPEND_S2IDLE ((__force suspend_state_t) 1) >> #define PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY ((__force suspend_state_t) 2) >> #define PM_SUSPEND_MEM ((__force suspend_state_t) 3) > > I feel something like PM_SUSPEND_IDLE is more consistent with the > existing PM_SUSPEND_MEM. Also the proposed PM_SUSPEND_S2IDLE has > 'SUSPEND' in it twice, so at the very least it should be > PM_SUSPEND_2IDLE :-) > > >> -#define PM_SUSPEND_MIN PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE >> +#define PM_SUSPEND_MIN PM_SUSPEND_S2IDLE >> #define PM_SUSPEND_MAX ((__force suspend_state_t) 4) OK, I can call it PM_SUSPEND_IDLE no problem. -- 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
