[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200908152344.46898.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 23:44:46 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Linux-pm mailing list" <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [RFC] PCI: Runtime power management
On Saturday 15 August 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:21:53PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > I can even imagine a scenario where this setting might be useful, like when
> > we don't want a network adapter to be woken up from the outside.
>
> I think in that case we'd probably just want the interface to be downed?
> Some of this is going to require device-specific policy, I think - for
> the network case we probably want something in between IF_RUNNING and
> IF_DOWN (IF_CARRIER, perhaps) that indicates that we want the PHY to be
> powered. Pushing this out to sysfs would mean we'd have a consistent
> interface but varying semantics, and I'm not convinced that's an
> especially helpful interface.
I'm not disagreeing with that.
At this point I'd like to know the Alan's opinion. I would gladly use the
'runtime_forbidden' flag only, but if we overlook something now, it's going
to be difficult to fix later.
Thanks,
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