On Thursday 05 February 2009, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:> This is a non-blocking interface that specifies which suspend state to> enter when no wakelocks are locked. A special state, "on", stops the> process by locking the "main" wakelock.> > If early-suspend support is enabled, early suspend handlers will be called> when a state other than "on" is written. When writing "on", the corresonding> resume handlers are called.> > Signed-off-by: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@xxxxxxxxxxx>> ---> kernel/power/main.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++> 1 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)> > diff --git a/kernel/power/main.c b/kernel/power/main.c> index e2aae3e..676a8b0 100644> --- a/kernel/power/main.c> +++ b/kernel/power/main.c> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@> #include <linux/freezer.h>> #include <linux/vmstat.h>> #include <linux/syscalls.h>> +#include <linux/wakelock.h>> > #include "power.h"> > @@ -388,6 +389,9 @@ static void suspend_finish(void)> > > static const char * const pm_states[PM_SUSPEND_MAX] = {> +#ifdef CONFIG_WAKELOCK> + [PM_SUSPEND_ON] = "on",> +#endif> [PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY] = "standby",> [PM_SUSPEND_MEM] = "mem",> };> @@ -545,6 +549,73 @@ static ssize_t state_store(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr,> power_attr(state);> #endif> > +/**> + * request_state - control system power state.> + *> + * This is similar to state, but it does not block until the system> + * resumes, and it will try to re-enter the state until another state is> + * requsted. Wakelocks are respected and the requested state will only> + * be entered when no wakelocks are held. Write "on" to cancel.> + *> + * If CONFIG_EARLYSUSPEND is set, early_suspend hooks are called when> + * the requested state changes to or from "on"> + */> +> +#ifdef CONFIG_WAKELOCK> +static ssize_t request_state_show(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr,> + char *buf)> +{> + char *s = buf;> + int i;> +> + for (i = 0; i < PM_SUSPEND_MAX; i++) {> + if (pm_states[i] && valid_state(i))> + s += sprintf(s,"%s ", pm_states[i]);> + }> + if (s != buf)> + /* convert the last space to a newline */> + *(s-1) = '\n';> + return (s - buf);> +}
Isn't the above duplicated code?
> +> +static ssize_t request_state_store(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr,> + const char *buf, size_t n)> +{> + suspend_state_t state = PM_SUSPEND_ON;> + const char * const *s;> + char *p;> + int len;> + int error = -EINVAL;> +> + p = memchr(buf, '\n', n);> + len = p ? p - buf : n;> +> + for (s = &pm_states[state]; state < PM_SUSPEND_MAX; s++, state++) {> + if (*s && len == strlen(*s) && !strncmp(buf, *s, len))> + break;> + }> + if (state < PM_SUSPEND_MAX && *s)> + if (state == PM_SUSPEND_ON || valid_state(state)) {> + error = 0;> +#ifdef CONFIG_EARLYSUSPEND> + request_suspend_state(state);> +#else
Remove this #ifdef please.
> + if (!mutex_trylock(&pm_mutex))> + return -EBUSY;> + requested_suspend_state = state;> + if (state == PM_SUSPEND_ON)> + wake_lock(&main_wake_lock);> + else> + wake_unlock(&main_wake_lock);
What's the main_wake_lock and what exactly is its role?
> + mutex_unlock(&pm_mutex);> +#endif> + }> + return error ? error : n;> +}> +> +power_attr(request_state);> +#endif> +> #ifdef CONFIG_PM_TRACE> int pm_trace_enabled;> > @@ -574,6 +645,9 @@ static struct attribute * g[] = {> #ifndef CONFIG_DISABLE_SYS_POWER_STATE> &state_attr.attr,> #endif> +#ifdef CONFIG_WAKELOCK> + &request_state_attr.attr,> +#endif> #ifdef CONFIG_PM_TRACE> &pm_trace_attr.attr,> #endif
I don't think all of this is really necessary. IMO we should create bustype-specific interfaces for putting devices into low power states at run time,that will work along with the existing suspend-resume infrastructure,instead of this.
Thanks,Rafael_______________________________________________linux-pm mailing listlinux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
