Re: Runtime PM status sysfs attribute

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

 



On Thursday, July 01, 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> 
> > Alan,
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 01:16:31PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > As runtime PM becomes more and more popular, it seems likely that 
> > > people will want to know whether or not their devices are getting 
> > > suspended.  Or if not people, then programs like powertop.
> > > 
> > > For that reason, it seems to make sense to build the runtime_status
> > > sysfs attribute even when CONFIG_PM_ADVANCED_DEBUG isn't enabled.  Do
> > > you agree?
> > 
> > good idea; haven't looked at any dependencies yet, though...
> 
> Reading through the code shows there is a drawback: For subsystems that
> don't implement runtime PM, devices will always show up as "suspended".  
> That's not going to be very useful, unfortunately.
> 
> Still, for subsystems that _do_ implement runtime PM, there doesn't 
> seem to be any other way to learn the current status of a device.

Perhaps we can rework the attribute to show "unknown" for devices that
have power.disable_depth > 0 ?

Rafael
_______________________________________________
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