On Thursday 04 February 2010, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > /*
> > + * control - Report/change current runtime PM setting of the device
> > + *
> > + * Runtime power management of a device can be blocked with the help of
> > + * this attribute. All devices have one of the following two values for
> > + * the power/control file:
> > + *
> > + * + "auto\n" to allow the device to be power managed at run time;
> > + * + "on\n" to prevent the device from being power managed at run time;
>
> I find interface with mandatory \n quite 'interesting'.
This simply follows the other descriptions in this file.
> Plus english is strange here. All devices have ... "auto" to allow...?
> Strange formulation. List the values first, then add "write ... to allow"?
Ditto.
> > + * The default for all devices is "auto", which means that devices may be
> > + * subject to automatic power management, depending on their drivers.
>
> Is it wise to specify 'auto' default value for devices without runtime
> pm?
Yes, it is. It means the user space doesn't care whether or not the device is
power managed at run-time.
> > +static ssize_t control_store(struct device * dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> > + const char * buf, size_t n)
> > +{
> > + char *cp;
> > + int len = n;
> > +
> > + cp = memchr(buf, '\n', n);
> > + if (cp)
> > + len = cp - buf;
> > + if (len == sizeof ctrl_auto - 1 && strncmp(buf, ctrl_auto, len) == 0)
> > + pm_runtime_allow(dev);
>
> parenthesis after sizeof?
This notation is used throughout this file too.
> Do I read it correctly that all of
>
> "auto"
> "auto\n"
> "auto\non\nIm confused"
>
> will switch to auto?
Perhaps it would, but what exactly is the problem with that?
Rafael
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
