Re: [PATCH] Enable async suspend/resume on industrial IO devices

[Jonathan Cameron]

On 04/06/11 23:47, Sonny Rao wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 3:59 AM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 04/06/11 03:45, Sonny Rao wrote:
>>> Industrial I/O devices can sometimes take a long time to resume,
>>> allowing them to be asynchronus saves 50ms on one light sensor
>>>
>> Hi Sonny,
>>
>> cc'd linux-iio
>>
>> I'm not particularly familiar with this.  Are there any disadvantages?
>> I just wonder if it would be better to push this into individual drivers
>> rather than the core?
> 
> Yeah we could do it that way too, I sent out a similar patch for i2c
> and people were asking if it was entirely safe.  It sounds like it may
> depend on dependencies between devices.
> 
> Do you know if any of the devices in iio have inter-device dependencies?
> I was under the impression they were mostly stand-alone sensors that
> ordinarily wouldn't, but I haven't tried to audit all of them or anything.
Mostly I think is the key word here.  Right now I don't think we have anything
that would have a problem, but putting something like that in the core is
liable to bite sometime in the future.  For now at least I think I'd prefer
to see it in an individual driver.
--
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/