From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@lists.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Re: Runtime PM and device locking
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 16:10:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050811141019.GA16264@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0508081645010.4470-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1359 bytes --]
Hi!
> > This solution is very similar to the power object tree patch I'm currently
> > working on. The main difference is that I'm using pre-state-change and
> > post-state-change notification methods. The advantage is that we should
> > be able to use an iterative algorithm, allowing for deep power trees. I'll
> > post code soon.
>
> I'm looking forward to seeing it. However, I think an iterative algorithm
> may be impractical, to a greater or lesser extent. (Not to mention the
> fact that in any particular case we never need both pre- and post-
> notifications.)
>
> Consider a device that has many power parents (P1 - Pn). A typical
> power-state change for this device might have to go like this:
>
> Do something to the device.
>
> Notify P1.
>
> Do some more to the device.
>
> Notify P2.
>
> Do some more to the device.
>
> ...
>
> Notify Pn.
>
> Do the last thing to the device.
Ouch, thats really ugly. Is it really neccessary to do something to
the device just after notifying parent?
I thought it would be more like
mouse
"oh, I'm idle".
power myself down.
tell all my parents that they can power down my cord.
If something is neccessary to be done after changing parent state, I'd
do it during call from parent.
Pavel
--
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-08-11 14:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-06 19:28 Runtime PM and device locking Alan Stern
2005-08-08 19:40 ` Patrick Mochel
2005-08-08 20:03 ` Alan Stern
2005-08-08 16:41 ` Adam Belay
2005-08-08 20:58 ` Alan Stern
2005-08-11 14:10 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-08-08 21:15 Woodruff, Richard
2005-08-08 22:17 ` Alan Stern
2005-08-08 22:45 Woodruff, Richard
2005-08-09 14:13 ` Alan Stern
2005-08-11 14:24 Preece Scott-PREECE
2005-08-11 14:32 ` Pavel Machek
2005-08-11 14:52 ` Alan Stern
2005-08-11 14:40 Preece Scott-PREECE
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050811141019.GA16264@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox