On Sun, 2007-07-08 at 16:22 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Sun, 8 Jul 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > I'm all for changing this infrastructure, but in an organized way (ie. we > > discuss what to do next, we do that and then we go to the next step) and in > > the order that everyone will be comfortable with. > > > > So, let's finish this thread and start over from discussing what needs to be > > done, how (ie. in what order etc.) we are going to do that and who is going to > > do what. Shall we? > > IMO we should start by using the new notifier chain and by implementing > a central "icebox" routine. Then we can forbid device registration > during suspend. > > It might also be a good idea to add a freezable keventd-like workqueue > specifically intended for things that need to block during a suspend. > Although maybe this will end up being unnecessary; it's too soon to > tell. I think looking at the kmallo/gfp issue I mentioned earlier should be done asap. I can try to spare some time for it this week but I can't promise, I'm actually swamped by something totally unrelated at the moment. Another issue that's been a problem forever with suspend is the synchronous request_firmware interface. Lots of drivers do that in resume() which will generally not work. Ben. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
