From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265348AbUHDDg4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2004 23:36:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265099AbUHDDg4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2004 23:36:56 -0400 Received: from ylpvm01-ext.prodigy.net ([207.115.57.32]:9106 "EHLO ylpvm01.prodigy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265348AbUHDDgy (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2004 23:36:54 -0400 From: David Brownell To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: Solving suspend-level confusion Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 20:30:41 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 Cc: Oliver Neukum , Pavel Machek , Linux Kernel list , Patrick Mochel References: <20040730164413.GB4672@elf.ucw.cz> <200408031928.08475.david-b@pacbell.net> <1091588163.5225.77.camel@gaston> In-Reply-To: <1091588163.5225.77.camel@gaston> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200408032030.41410.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 03 August 2004 19:56, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > Actually, I took a shortcut with my PPC implementation of swsusp, > which was to tweak the numbering of PM_SUSPEND_* so that > > PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY = 1 > PM_SUSPEND_MEM = 3 > PM_SUSPEND_DISK = 4 > > Which has the "side effect" of matching S states and mostly D states > with the exception of disk, for the few drivers that care... So long as there's a comment explaining what's going on there ("original PCI PM API compatibility") this wins hugely on expedience! > But in the long run, this may add confusion instead of clearing things, > I agree we should rather move to completely different types, though I > don't feel like re-typing every callbacks in the tree right now... Me either. But renumbering the PM_SUSPEND_* values would let folk start discussing what PM should be (and do) without that particular pressure. - Dave