Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263337AbTIAWst (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2003 18:48:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263338AbTIAWst (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2003 18:48:49 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([212.18.232.186]:6152 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263337AbTIAWso (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2003 18:48:44 -0400 Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 23:48:40 +0100 From: Russell King To: Pavel Machek Cc: Linus Torvalds , kernel list , Patrick Mochel Subject: Re: Fix up power managment in 2.6 Message-ID: <20030901234840.H22682@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Pavel Machek , Linus Torvalds , kernel list , Patrick Mochel References: <20030831232812.GA129@elf.ucw.cz> <20030901211220.GD342@elf.ucw.cz> <20030901225243.D22682@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20030901221920.GE342@elf.ucw.cz> <20030901233023.F22682@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> <20030901224018.GA470@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20030901224018.GA470@elf.ucw.cz>; from pavel@ucw.cz on Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 12:40:18AM +0200 X-Message-Flag: Your copy of Microsoft Outlook is vulnerable to viruses. See www.mutt.org for more details. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1716 Lines: 38 On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 12:40:18AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > The main advantage from a driver writers point of view is the disposal > > of the "level" argument. (Doesn't really affect x86, PCI drivers never > > had visibility of this.) > > Yes, "level" is gone, instead we have very ugly > -EAGAIN-means-call-me-with-interrupts-disabled hack. >From a driver writers point of view, that's something I won't be using. If I'm told to suspend, I better suspend. If the driver model is calling me out of sequence (because there are other children depending on me) then it hasn't taken notice of my ordering requirements. (Note - this bit isn't complete, but then the new model is no worse off than the old model at present with respect to that issue. The new model does provide the interfaces to allow drivers to specify these dependencies though.) > > However, I'll let the PPC people justify the real reason for the driver > > model change, since it was /their/ requirement that caused it, and I'm > > not going to fight their battles for them. (although I seem to be doing > > exactly that while wasting my time here.) > > I noticed something going on, but it seem to me one more "struct bus" > would have solved that... I've no idea what the PPC problem exactly was. It's up to the PPC guys to speak up *now*. -- Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html - 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/