Re: [linux-pm] [patch 2.6.25-rc6 3/7] pci_choose_state() cleanup and fixes

Alan Stern
2008-03-21T00:55:43Z

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> The original code executed platform_pci_choose_state() first, if defined, and
> if that succeeded, it just returned the result. You put
> platform_pci_choose_state() under the switch(). :-)

For FREEZE and QUIESCE, is there ever any reason to leave D0? These
calls are documented as not requiring (and not desiring!) any change in
power level.

> Consequently, the 'state' argument would simply be unnecessary (and in fact
> it's ignored if platform_pci_choose_state() is defined).

It should not be ignored, for the reason given above.

Alan Stern