Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268234AbUIXMmw (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:42:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268717AbUIXMmw (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:42:52 -0400 Received: from mail1.kontent.de ([81.88.34.36]:46297 "EHLO Mail1.KONTENT.De") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268234AbUIXMmr (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:42:47 -0400 From: Oliver Neukum To: "Li, Shaohua" Subject: Re: suspend/resume support for driver requires an external firmware Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:42:03 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 Cc: "Benjamin Herrenschmidt" , "Patrick Mochel" , "Zhu, Yi" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" References: <16A54BF5D6E14E4D916CE26C9AD3057534510B@pdsmsx402.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <16A54BF5D6E14E4D916CE26C9AD3057534510B@pdsmsx402.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200409241442.03078.oliver@neukum.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1515 Lines: 31 Am Freitag, 24. September 2004 13:52 schrieb Li, Shaohua: > I somewhat think choice 2 is better. The pre-load can be invoked in any > order instead of in the device tree hierarchy order. And currently only > few devices need it, is it worth adding it in the device core? If order doesn't matter, the device tree order is as good as any other order. > In addition, the notifiers have better flexibility. We can easily add > more notifier types if needed, such as adding a callback between the > sysdev resume and regular devices resume. To tell the truth, we actually > have the case. An ACPI link device must resume before regular devices > but must be with IRQ enabled. I'm considering add a call back between > sysdev and regular devices resume for the issue. I guess the MTRR driver > in SMP has the same requirement. Anyway, notifier solution sounds like > easier to extend, but we can't extend device core casually. If you add this stuff to anything but the device core, you have to teach the drivers about the various notifier chains. Why would adding methods to the device core be harder than adding notifier chains? If drivers do not need the method they don't need to implement it. If they do need it, using a notifier chain isn't easier. Regards Oliver - 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/