Re: [linux-pm] driver power operations (was Re: suspend2 merge)
From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Fri Apr 27 2007 - 11:54:01 EST
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> I think we can use 'stages' and pass them as arguments to the functions.
No, no NOOOO!
If you use stages, just describe them in the function name instead.
> quiesce(PREPARE) -- that may be needed for drivers that allocate much memory
> before quiescing devices (if any)
There is *no* advantage to this (and _lots_ of disadvantages) compared to
The latter is
- more readable
- MUCH easier for programmers to write readable code for (if-statements
and case-statements are *by*definition* more complicated to parse both
for humans and for CPU's - static information is good)
- allows for the different stages to have different arguments, and
somewhat related to that, to have better static C type checking.
Look here, which one is more readable:
int some_mixed_function(int arg)
if (arg == SLEEP)
and quite frankly, while the second case may take more lines of code,
anybody who says that it's not clearer what it does (because it can
"self-document" with function names etc) is either lying, or just a really
bad programmer. The second case is also likely faster and probably not
larger code-size-wise either, since it does static decisions _statically_
(since all callers are realistically going to use a constant argument
anyway, and the argument really is static).
Finally, the second case is *much* easier to fix, exactly because it
doesn't mix up the cases. You can change the arguments, you can have
totally different locking, you don't need things like
int gfp = (arg == SLEEP) ? GFP_ATOMIC : GFP_KERNEL;
etc, and it's just more logical.
So don't overload a function. That's the *bug* with the current
"dev->suspend()" interface already. Don't re-create it. The current one
overloads two *totally*different* operations onto one function.
Just don't do it. Not in the suspend part, not *ever*.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/