lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: Solving suspend-level confusion
    Date
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:4.200 / U:0.340 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site