[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0907081707090.22618-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 17:09:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Introduce core framework for run-time PM of
I/O devices (rev. 8)
On Wed, 8 Jul 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > I thought you wanted to avoid this sort of complication.
>
> I did, but there might be some benefits. For example, the timer and the work
> structure provided by dev.power can be used for scheduling such operations
> if they are defined at the core level.
>
> Suppose your device has 3 low power states D1 - D3 (like PCI) and you want it
> to go into D1 first, then, after a delay, to D2 and finally, again after a
> delay, to D3. Of course, if there's a resume in the meantime, it should cancel
> whichever transition is in progress.
>
> pm_runtime_suspend() can be used for the first transition, but the bus type or
> driver will have to provide its own mechanics for going down to D2 and D3,
> which must be synchronized with its ->runtime_resume(). That might be tricky
> and the core already has what's necessary (well, almost).
Maybe we can provide a way for drivers to set up their own timer
callback or work routine for use while the status is RPM_SUSPENDED.
Alan Stern
--
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