On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 12:16 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Adding platform hook to disable interrupts just because we need one > platform device last is not nice, either. (And does decrementer even > need to come last?) But the hack is classifying the decrementer as a platform device in the first place. And then we'd still need to have one platform device and one sysdev since we want to wake up the decrementer before enabling IRQs but set it to a high value before disabling IRQs. Or we'd need some sort of special foo device that has hooks both before and after and comes last/first, just for one user? Besides, we can always rewrite it later when somebody introduces a foo device that fits above model. Since this patch essentially changes nothing, I'd been hoping to get it into .22 so we can finally start having a sane userspace interface for suspend on powermac. I can dream, right? Besides, disabling IRQs really seems like a platform issue and as such pm_ops should be able to control it. Why are you so much opposed to that idea? Would a patch that says Introduce pm_ops.quiesce and pm_ops.activate to make platforms control IRQ disabling and enabling (respectively). and doesn't mention powermac be more acceptable? johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
