On Sunday 08 February 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Sat 2009-02-07 23:37:39, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday 05 February 2009, Arve Hj??nnev??g wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Arve Hj??nnev??g <arve@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > This is completely wrong, IMO. > > > > Removing an interface that has existed forever just because it happens to > > be incompatible with your new shiny feature is not acceptable to me. > > Agreed. AFAICS this patch can be just dropped, or maybe kept specially > for android if those few bytes matter to them. Just to make things crystal clear, in fact I don't like any patches in this series. The wakelocks seem to be overdesigned to me and the "early suspend" thing doesn't really fit our suspend-resume framework, especially after the changes made recently to the PCI PM code (and the changes that are going to be made to it shortly). Thanks, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
