[linux-pm] Some thoughts on suspend/resume development

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

 



On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 01:34 -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 March 2005 00:59, Adam Belay wrote:
> > 
> > I agree that individual drivers should track their own usage.  I was
> > just wondering if we could provide some utility functions that would
> > help with this.
> > 
> 
> Did we remove pm_access() and friends just a tad early?
> 

Perhaps so...

I'm not sure if pm_access() was correct.  For example, what if the power
management policy decided to turn off a device in the middle of device
access?  Just because pm_access() is called, it doesn't mean the device
state is locked to active.  Wouldn't this be a race condition?  In
general, I think locking for this sort of thing could get very tricky.

Also, in our new design, I think something like pm_access() should be
called primarily at the class level.  Comments?

Thanks,
Adam



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ACPI]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux