From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Null suspend/resume functions Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:41:25 +0000 Message-ID: <20091117124125.GD823@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <20091109105858.GB1245@sirena.org.uk> <20091109133136.GC1245@sirena.org.uk> <20091116153000.GB29479@sirena.org.uk> <20091117115236.GB1376@ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id AADD71038D9 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:41:26 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091117115236.GB1376@ucw.cz> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Pavel Machek Cc: Kuninori Morimoto , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Magnus Damm , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 12:52:36PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > I believe that having few nop functions around the tree should not be > huge problem. If it is, you can introduce one shared top function into > the core... The problem I have with that is that for most APIs noop functions are a big fat warning sign that something is going wrong and the API is being abused. This then creates noise and code review problems in the driver code since you've got something that normally suggests a problem. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755949AbZKQMlX (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:41:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755574AbZKQMlW (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:41:22 -0500 Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:51977 "EHLO opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753319AbZKQMlV (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:41:21 -0500 Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:41:25 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Pavel Machek Cc: Kuninori Morimoto , Magnus Damm , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Null suspend/resume functions Message-ID: <20091117124125.GD823@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <20091109105858.GB1245@sirena.org.uk> <20091109133136.GC1245@sirena.org.uk> <20091116153000.GB29479@sirena.org.uk> <20091117115236.GB1376@ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091117115236.GB1376@ucw.cz> X-Cookie: That's no moon... User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 12:52:36PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > I believe that having few nop functions around the tree should not be > huge problem. If it is, you can introduce one shared top function into > the core... The problem I have with that is that for most APIs noop functions are a big fat warning sign that something is going wrong and the API is being abused. This then creates noise and code review problems in the driver code since you've got something that normally suggests a problem.