Messages in this thread | | | From | David Brownell <> | Subject | Re: Solving suspend-level confusion | Date | Tue, 3 Aug 2004 20:30:41 -0700 |
| |
On Tuesday 03 August 2004 19:56, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Actually, I took a shortcut with my PPC implementation of swsusp, > which was to tweak the numbering of PM_SUSPEND_* so that > > PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY = 1 > PM_SUSPEND_MEM = 3 > PM_SUSPEND_DISK = 4 > > Which has the "side effect" of matching S states and mostly D states > with the exception of disk, for the few drivers that care...
So long as there's a comment explaining what's going on there ("original PCI PM API compatibility") this wins hugely on expedience!
> But in the long run, this may add confusion instead of clearing things, > I agree we should rather move to completely different types, though I > don't feel like re-typing every callbacks in the tree right now...
Me either. But renumbering the PM_SUSPEND_* values would let folk start discussing what PM should be (and do) without that particular pressure.
- Dave
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |