On Mon, 20 Apr 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday 16 April 2009, Michael Trimarchi wrote: > > Drivers on embedded systems would be smart enough > > to know that some of the devices should remain powered up, because > > they could still be useful even when the CPU wasn't running. > > The patch add the in_use attribute, that it can be used by the > > the drivers to avoid power down during suspend. > > OK, so the idea is that in_use will be set by the user space for devices that > shouldn't be suspended. Is this correct? > > Assuming it is, I'd call the flag 'in_use' rather than 'is_inuse'. Also, if > may_inuse is supposed to mean that we can set in_use for this device, I'd call > it 'in_use_valid', I'd make it be unset by default and I'd allow the driver to > unset it if it is going to react to 'in_use'. I don't see why two separate flags are needed. Why can't there be just one? Also, I don't see why the in_use flag has to propagate down to all the descendant devices when it is set. Why not let userspace be responsible for that? Finally, I don't like either name very much. This flag is supposed to indicate that the device is being used in a mode that can run by itself even when the rest of the system is suspended. Calling it "in_use" doesn't express the crucial fact that the device is self-sufficient. Alan Stern _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
