Re: [PATCH 1/4] PM / s2idle: Rename PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE to PM_SUSPEND_S2IDLE

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 02:56:43PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> To make it clear that the symbol in question refers to
>>> suspend-to-idle, rename it from PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE to
>>> PM_SUSPEND_S2IDLE.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/acpi/sleep.c             |    2 -
>>>  drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c |    2 -
>>>  include/linux/suspend.h          |    4 +--
>>>  kernel/power/suspend.c           |   44 +++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>>>  kernel/power/suspend_test.c      |    4 +--
>>>  5 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> Index: linux-pm/include/linux/suspend.h
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- linux-pm.orig/include/linux/suspend.h
>>> +++ linux-pm/include/linux/suspend.h
>>> @@ -33,10 +33,10 @@ static inline void pm_restore_console(vo
>>>  typedef int __bitwise suspend_state_t;
>>>
>>>  #define PM_SUSPEND_ON                ((__force suspend_state_t) 0)
>>> -#define PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE    ((__force suspend_state_t) 1)
>>> +#define PM_SUSPEND_S2IDLE    ((__force suspend_state_t) 1)
>>>  #define PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY   ((__force suspend_state_t) 2)
>>>  #define PM_SUSPEND_MEM               ((__force suspend_state_t) 3)
>>
>> I feel something like PM_SUSPEND_IDLE is more consistent with the
>> existing PM_SUSPEND_MEM. Also the proposed PM_SUSPEND_S2IDLE has
>> 'SUSPEND' in it twice, so at the very least it should be
>> PM_SUSPEND_2IDLE :-)
>>
>>
>>> -#define PM_SUSPEND_MIN               PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE
>>> +#define PM_SUSPEND_MIN               PM_SUSPEND_S2IDLE
>>>  #define PM_SUSPEND_MAX               ((__force suspend_state_t) 4)
>
> OK, I can call it PM_SUSPEND_IDLE no problem.

Actually, I'm thinking that PM_SUSPEND_TO_IDLE may be even better ...