From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760695AbYDAVe6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 17:34:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758198AbYDAVeu (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 17:34:50 -0400 Received: from mail.crca.org.au ([67.207.131.56]:53679 "EHLO crca.org.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757415AbYDAVes (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 17:34:48 -0400 X-Bogosity: Ham, spamicity=0.000000 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and hibernation callbacks (rev. 6) From: Nigel Cunningham To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: pm list , ACPI Devel Maling List , Alan Stern , Greg KH , Len Brown , LKML , Alexey Starikovskiy , David Brownell , Pavel Machek , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Oliver Neukum In-Reply-To: <200804012212.48609.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <200803292317.50218.rjw@sisk.pl> <200803312329.03455.rjw@sisk.pl> <1207037741.23143.81.camel@nigel-laptop> <200804012212.48609.rjw@sisk.pl> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Christian Reformed Churches of Australia Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 08:35:13 +1100 Message-Id: <1207085713.23143.111.camel@nigel-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Rafael etc. On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 22:12 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > 'ext' means 'extended'. The idea is that the 'extended' version will be used > by bus types / driver types that don't need to implement the _noirq callbacks. > Both the platform and PCI bus types generally allow drivers to use _noirq > callbacks, so they use 'struct pm_ext_ops', as well as their corresponding > driver types. Do you mean to say in the first sentence "...that _do_ need to implement..."? If not, then extended sounds like a misnomer and the two sentences seem to contradict one another. [...] > > > + * However, drivers may NOT assume anything about the availability of the > > > + * user space at that time and it is not correct to request firmware from > > > + * within @prepare() (it's too late to do that). > > > > That doesn't sound good. It would be good to be able to get drivers to > > request firmware early in the process. > > That will be possible when we drop the freezer. Yeah, but right now, it seems to me to be a bogus limitation for drivers to have no way of automatically loading firmware when you're about to hibernate. (Of course I've since been reminded of the notifier chain - that should probably be mentioned here as the way of achieving this). By the way, I'm going to go on record now as saying I think dropping the freezer is a silly idea. I'm therefore currently considering including the freezer in TuxOnice from the time it gets dropped from mainline. I know that will only make it less likely that TuxOnIce gets merged, but I've given up caring about that anyway - caring about merging is pointless when the people who decide if it gets merged don't care. Regards, Nigel