[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201012171425.07775.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:25:07 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>, stern@...land.harvard.edu,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: platform/i2c busses: pm runtime and system sleep
On Friday, December 17, 2010, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:56:57PM +0530, Rabin Vincent wrote:
>
> > There seem to be some differences between the generic ops and the i2c
> > and platform busses' implementations of the interaction between runtime
> > PM and system sleep:
>
> > (1) The platform bus does not implement the
> > don't-call-pm->suspend()-if pm_runtime_suspended()-returns-true
> > functionality implemented by the generic ops and i2c.
>
> This is platform lagging behind I2C in implementation - both originally
> did what platform does and then I2C was updated and platform wasn't.
>
> It'd be really good if this could all be factored out into the PM core,
> we're going to have to do the same thing for at least SPI as well and
> possibly some other buses :/
So how exactly the PM core is supposed to include those things?
There certainly are other buses that don't want to do them.
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