Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751273AbeABP5x (ORCPT + 1 other); Tue, 2 Jan 2018 10:57:53 -0500 Received: from iolanthe.rowland.org ([192.131.102.54]:53578 "HELO iolanthe.rowland.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751100AbeABP5w (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jan 2018 10:57:52 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 10:57:51 -0500 (EST) From: Alan Stern X-X-Sender: stern@iolanthe.rowland.org To: Ulf Hansson cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linux PM , Kevin Hilman , LKML , Mika Westerberg Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] PM / core: Direct handling of DPM_FLAG_SMART_SUSPEND and DPM_FLAG_LEAVE_SUSPENDED In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: On Tue, 2 Jan 2018, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > While I acknowledge that Ulf doesn't appear to be convinced by my > > arguments, I also see no technical reason why this cannot go in. > > Correct, I am not convinced this is the right path as a general > optimization, at least in it's current form. The main argument is > about skipping invoking callbacks, as I have stated. > > Moreover, I think we are lacking important input from some more > experienced PM core code contributors, like Alan, Kevin etc. If any of > those guys would give an ack, that would also make me more comfortable > with this. > > On the other hand, I realize that we can't wait forever for that to happen. Sad to say, I have not been paying any significant attention to this patch series. The major points I have gleaned are that these are all relatively small optimizations, and that by default the patches do not change existing behavior (they are opt-in). So at first glance there's no pressing reason not to apply them. But admittedly, this viewpoint ignores the larger picture. Alan Stern