On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 13:01 -0500, Bob Copeland wrote: > On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:43:22 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote > > We should probably take the rtnl anyway though to be prepared for when > > userspace is not suspended.. Need to think about that more though, and > > possibly add a new "suspended" flag that makes it block all > > configuration attempts. > > Well, luckily we do take the rtnl already, wiphy_suspend() and _resume() > do that around the cfg ops. Good point. > IMHO a suspended flag would be extra complexity that we should just > hold off on until the freezer really is getting removed. Well, kinda a chicken-and-egg problem here, can't remove the freezer without looking at all this, but yeah, we can defer that and put it on the todo list. > For now is there anything besides driver support we need to do for this > patchset? I guess that the drivers will actually be OK as-is too unless > there are any that do release_firmware in ->stop(), but it will be nice > to clean them up. I don't see anything, drivers need to do at all. They should all be fine with suspending when hw is stopped anyway. We can remove some driver code though. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
