Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 3/5] [pm] Respect the actual device powerstates in sysfs interface

[Patrick Mochel]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006, Greg KH wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 03:59:25PM -0800, Patrick Mochel wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 18 Feb 2006, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > > Fix the per-device state file to respect the actual state that
> > > > is reported by the device, or written to the file.
> > >
> > > Can we let "state" file die? You actually suggested that at one point.
> > >
> > > I do not think passing states in u32 is good idea. New interface that passes
> > > state as string would probably be better.
> >
> > Yup, in the future that will be better. For now, let's work with what we
> > got and fix 2.6.16 to be compatible with previous versions..
>
> It's _way_ too late in the 2.6.16 cycle for this series of patches, if
> that is what you are proposing.

Would you mind commmenting on why, as well as your opinion on the validity
of the patches themselves?

This static, hardcoded policy was introduced into the core ~2 weeks ago,
and it doesn't seem like it belongs there at all. This seems like the
easiest way to fixing it, but I'm open to alternative suggestions..

Thanks,


	Pat
-
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/