Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759265AbXFOVvk (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:51:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758070AbXFOVvD (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:51:03 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:57168 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758754AbXFOVvA (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:51:00 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Alan Stern Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 6/7] PM: Remove power_state.event checks from suspend core code Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 23:57:57 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: David Brownell , Andrew Morton , Greg KH , LKML , Pavel Machek References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706152357.58613.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1722 Lines: 42 On Friday, 15 June 2007 04:00, Alan Stern wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Thursday, 14 June 2007 16:21, David Brownell wrote: > > > On Wednesday 13 June 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > > > > > > > The suspend routines should be called for every device during a system sleep > > > > transition, regardless of the device's state, so that drivers can regard these > > > > method calls as notifications that the system is about to go to sleep, rather > > > > than as directives to put their devices into the 'off' state. > > > > > > Did you audit all the drivers to make sure this won't break things? > > > Like for example through inappropriate pci_save_state() calls? > > > > I did, but not very carefully. > > > > > I'd really expect this patch would break things... > > > > Well, in that case I'll have a closer look at them. > > It might not be all that bad. One would expect problems to occur only > in cases where devices were already suspended at the time of a system > sleep transition. Since relatively few drivers currently implement > runtime PM -- and those that do are likely to be more careful about > not blindly making state changes -- there might not be too much > trouble. Yes, in fact I've had no problems related to that so far (tested the patch on four different machines). Greetings, Rafael -- "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth - 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/