On Thursday 13 August 2009, Alan Stern wrote: > On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > If the set of pm_connection objects is reasonably small then the > > > master_hook and slave_hook aren't needed; you can just read through the > > > entire list. Leaving out parent-child connections, which we already > > > know, would help shrink the set. > > > > Do you mean a global list for the entire system? I'm not sure if that wouldn't > > hurt performance (please note that it also affects runtime PM). > > It doesn't have to affect runtime PM. That is, for runtime PM we can > make the bus subsystems responsible for enforcing the dependencies. Since the runtime PM framework takes the parent-child relationships into accout, I think it should also follow the "master"-"slave" dependencies if they are represented at the core level. Still, at this point the question really is how many off-tree dependencies there are, because the best way to represent them will follow from that. Thanks, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
