From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oliver Neukum Subject: Re: Power-managing devices that are not of interest at some point in time Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 23:36:05 +0200 Message-ID: <1405546565.23419.3.camel@linux-fkkt.site> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Patrik Fimml , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Benson Leung , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 14:08 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > I am not so much concerned about userspace, but about reusing of as > > much of existing PM framework in the drivers. Right now it is very > > hard to correctly track dependencies between general open/close, > > system suspend/resume, and various runtime-PM transitions. Adding > yet > > another PM mechanism into the mix will just add more complexity. > > Would it make sense to unbind the drivers for these devices when the > lid is closed? With the drivers gone, there would naturally be no No, because I don't want settings of my devices to disappear. You can do that only for stateless devices. And I doubt you can tell in general which devices are stateless. Regards Oliver