On Sun, 23 Jan 2011, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 7:20 AM, Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > First case: you want to stop the clock _to_ the _card_ when not talking > > to it. That has nothing to do with power saving performed within the > > host controller. This is for reducing power consumption by the _card_ > > (and possibly by the clock generator). The runtime PM stuff has no > > business here as the decision to gate the clock on the card require > > MMC/SD protocol knowledge. > > But why can't it be implemented using the runtime PM framework ? Because as I see things now, it'll only make the code more complex for no real gain. > It's just plumbing; the decision and knowledge stays at the MMC core. > > It's possible to do it without making any compromises of use cases and > requirements. And if something is missing in the runtime PM framework, > it can be changed. It just needs someone who cares. I don't feel like modifying a generic infrastructure like the runtime PM framework just to accommodate a special case from the MMC subsystem which the MMC subsystem already handles well now anyway is necessarily productive. That will only increase complexity on both sides: the runtime PM framework _and_ the MMC subsystem. But hey, that someone who cares may prove me wrong. Nicolas
