Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753269AbZKPTi7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:38:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752375AbZKPTi6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:38:58 -0500 Received: from iolanthe.rowland.org ([192.131.102.54]:59249 "HELO iolanthe.rowland.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752177AbZKPTi6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:38:58 -0500 Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:39:03 -0500 (EST) From: Alan Stern X-X-Sender: stern@iolanthe.rowland.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" cc: pm list , LKML , Linux PCI , ACPI Devel Maling List , Jesse Barnes , Matthew Garrett , Oliver Neukum , Shaohua Li , Bjorn Helgaas Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/10] PM: Add flag for devices capable of generating run-time wake-up events In-Reply-To: <200911160049.22717.rjw@sisk.pl> 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 Content-Length: 918 Lines: 25 On Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Apparently, there are devices that can wake up the system from sleep > states and yet are incapable of generating wake-up events at run > time. Thus, introduce a flag indicating if given device is capable > of generating run-time wake-up events. This raises the question: Who is responsible for setting the new flag? The code that registers the device? What if the kernel can't tell whether or not the device can generate runtime wake-up events? What if the user wants to override the kernel's setting? Should there be a sysfs attribute controlling the flag? Alan Stern -- 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/