Re: [patch] enums to clear suspend-state confusion

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > I can replace suspend_state_t with enum system_state, but it might
> > mean that enum system_state will have to be extended with things like
> > RUNTIME_PM_PCI_D0 in future... I guess that's easiest thing to do. It
> > solves all the problems we have *now*.
> 
> Can you not also provide a function
> 
> 	pci_state_for(system_state)
> 
> then most of the drivers don't have to care. It would also be nice

I actually named that function to_pci_state(), but you had same idea.

> to have a driver flag to indicate which devices can simply be
> hotunplug/hotreplugged over a suspend and don't need extra duplicate
> code.

Hmm, I do not think it is that easy

suspend is:
	stop hardware

hotunplug is:
	stop hardware
	tell user/system it is gone

So it is more like suspend is subset of hotunplug. If coded properly,
hotunplug should probably call suspend code, resulting in no
duplication.

								Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
-
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/