Re: [RFC][PATCH] Power domains for platform bus type

[Alan Stern]

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> > One thing about this implementation is slightly questionable.  The new
> > power_domain callbacks were added to the __weak platform PM routines,
> > which means they will have to be included in every overriding routine
> > provided by a platform imiplementation.
> > 
> > Would it be better to separate these things?  Have the power_domain 
> > callbacks occur in a static outer function which then calls a public 
> > __weak inner function that can be overridden?
> 
> That certainly is a good idea, but I wasn't sure how to do that.  It looks
> like I could keep the __weak functions as they are and modify
> platform_dev_pm_ops instead to point to a new set of function that in turn
> would call the __weak ones.  For example, the .suspend pointer in
> platform_dev_pm_ops might point to a new function, say
> platform_pm_full_suspend() that would call the power domain functions and
> the "original" platform_pm_suspend().  Is that what you mean?

Yes.  But what about the platform_bus_set_pm_ops() interface?  Should
platform-specific replacements for the pm_ops functions also include
the power_domain callbacks?

Alan Stern

--
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/