From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nigel Cunningham Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management? Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 10:06:06 +1100 Message-ID: <1171235166.4493.100.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> References: <200702111536.20871.rjw@sisk.pl> <200702111953.02229.rjw@sisk.pl> Reply-To: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200702111953.02229.rjw@sisk.pl> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Robert Hancock , Matthew Garrett , Pavel Machek , Jeff Garzik , Daniel Barkalow , pm list , Willy Tarreau , linux-kernel List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Hi. On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 19:53 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Having drivers explicitly marked as to whether they are safe is a good = kernel > > feature; what to do if they're not is policy. > = > That's true, but I assume that the people who opt for doing that are also > willing to take part in the review of the drivers. :-) Absolutely :) > Well, I don't think so. Let's estimate the number of drivers that define > .resume() right now: > = > $ grep -I -l -r '.resume =3D' linux-2.6.20/drivers/ | wc > 102 102 4169 I think the '.resume =3D' doesn't help - some have tabs. I ran '\.resume' and got 351. It would be interesting to see how many struct pci_driver etc instances lack resume methods. Regards, Nige From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932870AbXBKXGN (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:06:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932906AbXBKXGN (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:06:13 -0500 Received: from nigel.suspend2.net ([203.171.70.205]:39094 "EHLO nigel.suspend2.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932870AbXBKXGM (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Feb 2007 18:06:12 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management? From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Daniel Barkalow , Willy Tarreau , Matthew Garrett , Robert Hancock , linux-kernel , Jeff Garzik , Pavel Machek , pm list In-Reply-To: <200702111953.02229.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <200702111536.20871.rjw@sisk.pl> <200702111953.02229.rjw@sisk.pl> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 10:06:06 +1100 Message-Id: <1171235166.4493.100.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi. On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 19:53 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Having drivers explicitly marked as to whether they are safe is a good kernel > > feature; what to do if they're not is policy. > > That's true, but I assume that the people who opt for doing that are also > willing to take part in the review of the drivers. :-) Absolutely :) > Well, I don't think so. Let's estimate the number of drivers that define > .resume() right now: > > $ grep -I -l -r '.resume =' linux-2.6.20/drivers/ | wc > 102 102 4169 I think the '.resume =' doesn't help - some have tabs. I ran '\.resume' and got 351. It would be interesting to see how many struct pci_driver etc instances lack resume methods. Regards, Nige