Re: [patch 2.6.25-rc6 3/7] pci_choose_state() cleanup and fixes

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

 



On Fri, 21 Mar 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> The original code executed platform_pci_choose_state() first, if defined, and
> if that succeeded, it just returned the result.  You put
> platform_pci_choose_state() under the switch(). :-)

For FREEZE and QUIESCE, is there ever any reason to leave D0?  These 
calls are documented as not requiring (and not desiring!) any change in 
power level.

> Consequently, the 'state' argument would simply be unnecessary (and in fact
> it's ignored if platform_pci_choose_state() is defined).

It should not be ignored, for the reason given above.

Alan Stern

_______________________________________________
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