Re: [PATCH 1/5] introduce .wakeup_event ops

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 16:09 +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 04:01:02PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 10:48 +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > 1) Notification is sent to a device. Since we know the device that 
> > > generated the event, we don't need .wakeup_event.
BTW, Alan thought we should trust BIOS can handle wakeup event correctly
here, so device don't need .wakeup_event. I have no strong objection
currently, but from my experience in ACPI side, BIOS is always not able
to be trusted.

> > > 2) Notification is sent to a bus. This will only happen if the device 
> > > supports PME, so we don't need .wakeup_event.
> > This depends on where you put the ACPI GPE code. If you put it to ACPI directory, then
> > we need a .wakeup_event at least in bus level.
> > ACPI is a generic framework, it can send wakeup event to any bus. It's
> > definitely better to put the wakeup GPE handling into ACPI directory.
> 
> I don't agree - the wakeup GPE will generate a standard notify, and the 
> notification handler has to be at the device or bus layer to handle 
> device-specific requests.
Then we will have duplicate code at each device or bus.

_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ACPI]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux