Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933818Ab1DNSUs (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:20:48 -0400 Received: from mail-gy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:42363 "EHLO mail-gy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933236Ab1DNSUo (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:20:44 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=qhEF+w8JpiViZUO1dXlIBSt46sjCg72pcICN0fZurFLLUMOXOF0ONtQKhgjd/k4hMA ezbk5/3yUqchGiFJrosFEijSKoEgBxuMqz4jpxsW3QybNKE6u3/lekBZXC6VtqF8rVRm YGEDcgcuyD9/EpmnC31p7GaU6kGSLBzaVkccE= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201104130205.26988.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <201104130205.26988.rjw@sisk.pl> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 03:20:42 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over subsystem ones From: Magnus Damm To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux PM mailing list , Kevin Hilman , LKML , Grant Likely , Len Brown , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, lethal@linux-sh.org, Alan Stern Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1396 Lines: 33 Hi Rafael, On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 9:05 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Change the PM core's behavior related to power domains in such a way > that, if a power domain is defined for a given device, its callbacks > will be executed instead of and not in addition to the device > subsystem's PM callbacks. Thanks for your work on this! I'm very happy to see a more fine grained interface for SoC specific code compared to the weak symbols and other coarse grained alternatives for the platform bus. My only thought on this is if we really want to limit ourselves to only control power domains using these callbacks. I can imagine that some SoCs want to do other non-power domain specific operations with these callbacks, and if so, perhaps using the term power domain as name of the pointer in struct device would be somewhat odd. OTOH, I really dislike naming discussions in general and I can't really think of any good names. So it all looks more like a set of system specific PM override hooks. Or is there something that is really power domain specific with these hooks? Thanks, / magnus -- 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/