From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>,
pm list <linux-pm@lists.osdl.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 07:54:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070211065404.GA943@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200702102050.28218.rjw@sisk.pl>
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 08:50:27PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, 10 February 2007 18:52, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> > On Sat, 10 Feb 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > > On Saturday, 10 February 2007 11:02, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > >
> > > > Well, the original desire was to stop new drivers getting in without
> > > > proper power management.
> > >
> > > I know, but I agree with the argument that having a driver without the
> > > suspend/resume support is better than not having the driver at all.
> >
> > How about if "proper power management" is defined to include the driver
> > explicitly preventing suspend? It seems to me like the current problem is
> > that driver writers don't think about power management at all, and the
> > result is that, after suspend/resume, the system doesn't come back. It
> > would be better if driver writers had to think about power management just
> > enough to realize that it's not going to work, and make this information
> > available to the system. At that point, it's relatively easy for the
> > system to do something useful about it.
>
> Actually, it is easy for the driver authors to do this right now. They can
> just make the .suspend() routine always return an error.
>
> Well, I think this is a good idea: if the device in question requires specific
> power management during the suspend/resume, but it is not implemented by the
> driver, we should require the author of the driver to define the .suspend()
> routine that returns -ENOSYS (preferably, with an explanatory warning in
> dmesg).
instead of modifying all drivers to explicitly state that they don't support
it, we should start with a test of the NULL pointer for .suspend which should
mean exactly the same without modifying the drivers. I find it obvious that
a driver which does provide a suspend function will not support it. And if
some drivers (eg /dev/null) can support it anyway, it's better to change
*those* drivers to explicitly mark them as compatible.
regards,
Willy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-11 6:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <fa.xSKPgY66Q+DPCZ1pszFFfdrJ0To@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <45CD24F6.8090107@shaw.ca>
[not found] ` <1171076554.10170.5.camel@nigel.suspend2.net>
2007-02-10 9:34 ` [PATCH] Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management? Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-10 10:02 ` Nigel Cunningham
2007-02-10 10:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-10 17:52 ` Daniel Barkalow
2007-02-10 19:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-11 6:54 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2007-02-11 12:13 ` Matthew Garrett
2007-02-11 13:09 ` Willy Tarreau
2007-02-11 13:19 ` Matthew Garrett
2007-02-11 13:37 ` Willy Tarreau
2007-02-11 13:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-11 13:57 ` Willy Tarreau
2007-02-11 14:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-11 15:19 ` Pekka Enberg
2007-02-11 18:31 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-11 17:27 ` Daniel Barkalow
2007-02-11 18:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-11 23:06 ` Nigel Cunningham
2007-02-11 23:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-02-11 21:04 ` Stefan Richter
2007-02-11 21:10 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-11 17:36 ` Robert Hancock
2007-02-11 22:49 ` Nigel Cunningham
2007-02-11 19:37 ` Pavel Machek
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=20070211065404.GA943@1wt.eu \
--to=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/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