Hi! > > > What we need for APM is freeze. > > > > OK, then so far as I'm concerned there's no longer > > any question about _needing_ "freeze". > > > > Should that just be a new suspend_state_t value > > Hrm... not sure what we ever called suspend_state_t ... I need to dig > Pavel proposals. > > The fact that all suspend() callbacks imply freeze, which is a drivers > state, makes me think that freeze is just what ... suspend() means. That > is, we can get rid of the "freeze" semantic altogether if we consider > that the pm_message contains a suggested "abstract" power state. suspend > with state "on" would mean freeze. As I said, I do not agree here. "Prepare to halt" does not need to stop DMAs, for example. Pavel -- People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
