On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, David Brownell wrote: > > > Good point. We probably should. That really really makes sense, and that > > also automagically solves the "network device" issue. > > I'm not sure doing that with class devcies is the right idea, at least > until they show up in the driver model tree as physical children of the > parent hardware (so that the driver model tree automatically handles > sequence constraints. See the example (admittedly untested) patch. You obviously have to walk the devices in _bus_ order, but once you do, there's nothing that prevents you from them using the _class_ suspend to help suspend that device. The fact that we can suspend with a class function does not mean that we have to _walk_ with a class order. So in a very real sense, the classes _do_ show up as physical children of the parent hardware: they show up as instances of devices. Linus
