Hi! > > >> I am in favor of 3) of 4). > > >> What do you think? > > > > > > Why don't we keep the tracepoints as proposed _and_ add two additional > > > tracepoints around device suspend-resume? > > I like the idea but that requires to extend the current API with > > additional suspend tracepoints or device state change tracepoints. > > That can be done once the current API is firmly in place. > > Today the only trace API for suspend is machine_suspend(unsigned int > > state), so I think the best option is 3) here above. > > > > Unless there is an objection I am pushing 3) asap. > > Fine by me. Why not... -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
