Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 19:38:52 +0000
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
Message-ID: <20070210193851.GA3956@ucw.cz>
References: <1171058269.1484.64.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <1171059433.8675.195.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1171059433.8675.195.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1064
Lines: 25

Hi!

> > I don't think this is already done (feel free to correct me if I'm
> > wrong)..
> > 
> > Can we start to NAK new drivers that don't have proper power management
> > implemented? There really is no excuse for writing a new driver and not
> > putting .suspend and .resume methods in anymore, is there?
> 
> to a large degree, a device driver that doesn't suspend is better than
> no device driver at all, right?
> now.. if you want to make the core warn about it, that's very fair

Well, driver that is broken on SMP is arguably better than no driver
at all, yet we'd probably avoid merging that. It would be nice to
start including suspend in 'must work' list...
							Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.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/