From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxim Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [3/6] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:26:18 +0200 Message-ID: <200703290026.18555.maximlevitsky@gmail.com> References: <200703281238.57811.david-b@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hu-out-0506.google.com ([72.14.214.233]:10401 "EHLO hu-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753191AbXC1W0e (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:26:34 -0400 Received: by hu-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 31so12082586huc for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:26:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: David Brownell , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, Jeff Chua , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@suse.de, linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Adrian Bunk , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, "Eric W. Biederman" , Ingo Molnar , Jens Axboe , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Thomas Gleixner , jgarzik@pobox.com, Andrew Morton On Wednesday 28 March 2007 22:42:00 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, David Brownell wrote: > > > > On Wednesday 28 March 2007 9:38 am, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > > It's a *device*, dammit. It should save and resume like one (probably as a > > > system device). The "set_mode()" etc stuff is at a completely different > > > (higher) conceptual level. > > > > Agreed, except about "probably as a system device". > > > > Last I checked, there was no good reason to use sysdev suspend()/resume() > > rather than platform_device suspend_late()/early_resume(). Which more > > or less means no good reason to use sysdev in new code... > > I won't disagree - it might well be much nicer to just show it in the > "real" device tree. I'm not 100% sure where in the tree it would go, > though. It should probably be "inside" the root entry, before any of the > PCI buses. It's generally what we've used those "system device" things > for, but I agree that it would be better to just make system devices show > up early on the regular device list than it is to have them be special > cases. > > Bit I think that's a separate (and fairly small) issue compared to the > "don't use the clocksource infrastructure as a make-believe suspend/resume > mechanism" problem that Maxim's patch had. > > (Maxim, don't take that the wrong way - I think your analysis and patch > were great, I just think another organization would be better) Exactly, I agree completely I said that my patch was a temporary fix, and I agree that the best way is to create a new system device and use its suspend/resume hooks to bring HPET back to life on resume. > > > Also, making HPET use the legacy mode seems like a step backwards. > > I don't think that's actually "legacy" in any sense but the interrupt > delivery, where the "legacy mode" bit is not so much that the HPET itself > is "legacy" but that it *replaces* legacy devices. > > But I may have misunderstood the thing. I'm an old fart, so I know the old > timers much better than I know the new ones ;). Somebody feel free to hit > me with the clue-2x4. > > Linus > Best regards, Maxim Levitsky