From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oliver Neukum Subject: Re: [RFC] sleepy linux Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 21:23:37 +0100 Message-ID: <200712262123.37152.oliver@neukum.org> References: <20071225230731.GA29030@elf.ucw.cz> <200712261828.04671.oliver@neukum.org> <20071226201722.GC8844@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20071226201722.GC8844@elf.ucw.cz> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Pavel Machek Cc: kernel list , Linux-pm mailing list , "Rafael J. Wysocki" List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 21:17:22 schrieb Pavel Machek: > On Wed 2007-12-26 18:28:04, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 26. Dezember 2007 00:07:31 schrieb Pavel Machek: > > > Heute 00:07:31 > > > =A0 > > > This is RFC. It does not even work for me... it sleeps but it wil= l not > > > wake up, because SATA wakeup code is missing. Code attached for i= llustration. > > >=20 > > > I wonder if this is the right approach? What is right interface t= o the > > > drivers? > >=20 > > IMHO you are making to many special cases. The system can be "sleep= y" > > if all devices can be runtime suspended and all CPUs are idle. >=20 > Is there an easy way to tell if all the devices are runtime suspended= ? Do you really want to know whether they are suspended or whether they could be suspended? > I guess I need to know from atomic context :-(. Urgh. suspend() must be able to sleep and can fail. Regards Oliver -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"= in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/