[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081207054149.GA20415@kroah.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 21:41:49 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI: Rework default handling of suspend and resume
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008 at 10:00:35AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > So, to fix the issue at hand, I'd like the $subject patch to go first. Then,
> > there is a major update of the new framework waiting for .29 in the Greg's
> > tree (that's the main reason why nobody uses it so far, BTW) and I'd really
> > prefer it to go next. After it's been merged, I'm going to add the mandatory
> > suspend-resume things (save state and go to a low power state on suspend,
> > restore state on resume) to the new framework in a separete patch.
> >
> > Is this plan acceptable?
>
> Sounds good to me. And assuming Jesse/Greg are all aboard, I'll just wait
> for the pull requests from Jesse and Greg.
No objection from me, I'll wait for Jesse to "go first" in the .29 merge
window.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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