Hi!
> >>The "initiators" all talk to _both_ infrastructures, but they
> >>don't talk to the driver model stuff in the same way. For
> >>example, on suspend:
> >Where does acpi call pm_*()? It seems like it does not and it seems
> >like a bug to me.
>
> Doesn't; it showed up in a 'grep' that I should have examined
> more closely. Sorry! But both swsusp and APM have the "using
> both registration schemes" issue (consistency matters here).
>
> Why does it seem like a bug -- because it's using only the "new"
> infrastructure, while there are still a few drivers that only
> register to the old one?
Yes.
> I'd rather see those drivers (about
> a dozen) have compile time #ifdef CONFIG_PM #warnings, and call
> them the bug...
I guess I like that, too.. But at this point whole PCI relies on
old-style pm_*(); that needs to be fixed, first.
Pavel
-- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?] - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 31 2003 - 22:00:50 EST