linux-kernel - Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:42:56 +1100
From:	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?

Hi.

On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 03:42 +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 08:57:49AM +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> 
> > Can we start to NAK new drivers that don't have proper power management
> > implemented? There really is no excuse for writing a new driver and not
> > putting .suspend and .resume methods in anymore, is there?
> 
> The PCI layer is able to deal with drivers that have no PM methods in 
> the most simple case.

Yeah. I suppose we could use a pm_safe bit flag in struct device_driver
and/or struct pci_driver. I have other things to do right now, but will
seek to understand the relationship between those structs better later.

Regards,

Nigel

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/