From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Subject: Re: RE: on-ness Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:15:31 -0700 Message-ID: <200604211115.31687.david-b@pacbell.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============27851347196859777==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: Preece Scott-PREECE Cc: linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, Pavel Machek List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org --===============27851347196859777== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 21 April 2006 10:58 am, Preece Scott-PREECE wrote: > However, I also have to admit that I like the notion of the zero-state > meaning having a consistent meaning across the different atttributes and > it might be good to have a similarly consistent name for the > maximum/full-operation state across the attributes... Well, not "zero-state" since that implies numbering. But sure, maybe that's what "on" should mean ... for CPUs, devices, systems. - Dave --===============27851347196859777== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline --===============27851347196859777==--