[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091116210545.GA29696@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:05:45 +0000
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>,
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/10] PM: Add flag for devices capable of
generating run-time wake-up events
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 04:00:49PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Yes, in general. The platform.
>
> And for non-platform devices (hot-pluggable, for example)? Presumably
> you would want the driver that detects and registers the device to set
> this flag.
Are there any cases where the bus code won't know this?
> > > What if the kernel can't tell whether or not the device can generate
> > > runtime wake-up events?
> >
> > Do you have any specific examples in mind?
>
> What about Matthew's example of an ACPI GPE which might or might not
> cause a runtime wake-up event, depending on the AML code in the BIOS?
The platform knows whether or not that's the case.
--
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