| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20090816160406.GA10163@srcf.ucam.org> Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:04:06 +0100 From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, 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 Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:57:53AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Sat, 15 Aug 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > Why would you ever want runtime_wakeup to be false unless > > > runtime_forbidden is true? Surely the point of runtime power management > > > is to be transparent to the user, in which case remote wakeup is > > > required? > > Matthew, what makes you think remote wakeup is required? Lots of > power-manageable devices don't support it at all (consider disk drives > or display screens). Sorry, I meant in cases where remote wakeup is a sensible concept. For things like storage there's obviously no reason to require it, but for something like USB the absence of remote wakeup would effectively break the driver for most users. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org -- 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