Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf: add calls to suspend trace point

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi!

> > >> I am in favor of 3) of 4).
> > >> What do you think?
> > >
> > > Why don't we keep the tracepoints as proposed _and_ add two additional
> > > tracepoints around device suspend-resume?
> > I like the idea but that requires to extend the current API with
> > additional suspend tracepoints or device state change tracepoints.
> > That can be done once the current API is firmly in place.
> > Today the only trace API for suspend is machine_suspend(unsigned int
> > state), so I think the best option is 3) here above.
> > 
> > Unless there is an objection I am pushing 3) asap.
> 
> Fine by me.

Why not...

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Arm (vger)]     [ARM Kernel]     [ARM MSM]     [Linux Tegra]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Maemo Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux