On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Oliver Neukum wrote: > The core problem is that you insist on a rigid bottom-to-top flow of > autosuspensions. That's good for systems like USB and PCI which > are trees for PM purposes. It makes no sense for true busses with > equal members on the bus. My framework is tree-oriented because it's based on the driver model, which uses a tree of devices. Even on a true bus, the members can't be entirely equal -- one of them has to be closer to the CPU than the others are. If that one member is in a low-power state then the CPU can't communicate with anything on the bus, unlike when one of the other members is in a low-power state. (I suppose in theory there could be a situation in which the CPU has direct communication with a bunch of devices, which can also communicate among themselves over some other bus. In such a situation we would represent the devices as members of separate branches in the device tree, so that suspending one would have no impact on suspending the others. The presence of the interconnecting bus would be ignored.) Alan Stern _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
