Re: [PATCH] implement pm_ops.valid for everybody

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

 



On Thursday 22 March 2007 3:03 am, Johannes Berg wrote:

> > And remember that the implementor must make various decisions in
> > any case, since the SOC probably has half a dozen distinct
> > low power states, but Linux can only name two of them.
> 
> Actually, now that we have everybody using .valid

Seems kind of temporary, so long as pm_set_ops() doesn't
enforce that as a requirement ...


> we can add an 
> arbitrary amount of them if we wish :>

For as many as can be #defined, yes.  But such #defines will
be rare; adding a new one would mean updating pm_states[]
plus maybe other code, and there are other structural issues
with that notion ... especially the way suspend() methods
have no way to determine the semantics of the target state.

- Dave
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm


[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