From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [RFC] input: syfs switches for SKE keypad Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 19:30:08 +0100 Message-ID: <20101012183008.GJ30933@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <20101012174942.GB10861@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:39416 "EHLO opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752922Ab0JLSaL (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Oct 2010 14:30:11 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: Sundar R IYER , "samu.p.onkalo@nokia.com" , Linus WALLEIJ , Naveen Kumar GADDIPATI , Dmitry Torokhov , "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" , Linux-pm mailing list , Jayeeta BANDYOPADHYAY On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 02:27:21PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, 12 Oct 2010, Mark Brown wrote: > > This isn't *really* about saving power in the individual device; it's > > more about stopping the device generating events that disrupt the rest > > of the system. Suspending the device can be one way of doing that and > > is useful if it can be done but is not really the immediate goal here. > Runtime PM is _not_ a reliable way of preventing a device from > generating events. It is meant for saving energy, nothing else. Right, yes. > If that's what this is about, then the answer is simple: Don't use > runtime PM to try to suppress events. I tend to agree that runtime PM usage ought to fall out of the disabling of the input device rather than the other way around.