On Wednesday 05 August 2009, Albin Tonnerre wrote: > On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 09:55:33PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote : > > On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 11:36:12AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote: > > > In a number of cases, the .suspend, .freeze, .poweroff and .resume, > > > .thaw, .restore functions are identical. However, they all need to be > > > assigned to avoid regressionsm as the previous code called .suspend > > > resp. .resume in all those cases. SIMPLE_PM_OPS allows to deal with > > > this case. > > > > I'd much rather have conversions done with a bit more analysis now that > > our framework is more flexible and we can have specialized routines for > > hibernation and suspend. > > I still think that even though they can, quite a number of drivers won't > /need/ to have different functions for this, but maybe I'm mistaken. > > > Maybe we should try changing from run-time to build time warning so that > > users are not overly concerned with it? > > I'm not sure that solves the problem. The fact is that even for developers, it's > easy to overlook that assiging only the .suspend and .resume fields is probably > a mistake. I agree, so I'm going to take the patch. I'll add a comment describing what the macro is for, though. Thanks, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
