Re: [PATCH] pm_ops: add irq enable/disable hooks

Pavel Machek
2007-04-06T19:19:03Z

Hi!

> > Frankly, I'm not sure.
> >
> > For practical purposes the BUG_ON() assertions will suffice, so I think you
> > can keep the two handlers. I'd change the names, though, to something
> > like quiesce() and activate(), for example.
>
> Sure.
>
> > [Hm, it feels more appropriate to define them for all platforms and make them
> > call local_irq_save() on the platforms that don't need to do anything more.]
>
> Is there much point in that? It seems to make implementing new pm_ops a
> bit more complex seeing that nobody but us seems to require such a thing
> yet.

And why do _you_ need it? Unfortunately I do not know what the
decrementer is...?
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html