[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200702120010.13996.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:10:11 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: nigel@...el.suspend2.net
Cc: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@...ervon.org>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
On Monday, 12 February 2007 00:06, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 19:53 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > Having drivers explicitly marked as to whether they are safe is a good kernel
> > > feature; what to do if they're not is policy.
> >
> > That's true, but I assume that the people who opt for doing that are also
> > willing to take part in the review of the drivers. :-)
>
> Absolutely :)
>
> > Well, I don't think so. Let's estimate the number of drivers that define
> > .resume() right now:
> >
> > $ grep -I -l -r '.resume =' linux-2.6.20/drivers/ | wc
> > 102 102 4169
>
> I think the '.resume =' doesn't help - some have tabs. I ran '\.resume'
> and got 351.
Ah, good catch. I have searched for ".resume" only and got 612, but this
is the number of files, not the number of drivers. And it is not exactly
large. ;-)
> It would be interesting to see how many struct pci_driver etc instances
> lack resume methods.
Yes, I'll try to invent a test.
Greetings,
Rafael
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists