Re: [RFC][PATCH] new timeofday arch specific hooks (v. A3)
From: Pavel Machek
Date: Tue Mar 15 2005 - 18:53:05 EST
On Út 15-03-05 15:42:09, john stultz wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 23:59 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > diff -Nru a/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c b/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c
> > > --- a/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c 2005-03-11 17:02:30 -08:00
> > > +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c 2005-03-11 17:02:30 -08:00
> > > @@ -224,6 +224,7 @@
> > > #include <linux/smp_lock.h>
> > > #include <linux/dmi.h>
> > > #include <linux/suspend.h>
> > > +#include <linux/timeofday.h>
> > >
> > > #include <asm/system.h>
> > > #include <asm/uaccess.h>
> > > @@ -1204,6 +1205,7 @@
> > > device_suspend(PMSG_SUSPEND);
> > > device_power_down(PMSG_SUSPEND);
> > >
> > > + timeofday_suspend_hook();
> > > /* serialize with the timer interrupt */
> > > write_seqlock_irq(&xtime_lock);
> > >
> > Could you just register timeofday subsystem as a system device? Then
> > device_power_down will call you automagically..... And you'll not have
> > to modify apm, acpi, swsusp, ppc suspend, arm suspend, ...
> That may very well be the right way to go. At the moment I'm just very
> hesitant of making any user-visible changes.
> What is the impact if a new system device name is created and then I
> later change it? How stable is that interface supposed to be?
Changing its name is okay... your device probably will not have any
user-accessible controls, right?
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/