linux-kernel - Re: platform/i2c busses: pm runtime and system sleep

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <201012171449.26082.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:49:25 +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 Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 02:25:07PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, December 17, 2010, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > 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.
> 
> By, for example, providing default implementations which the buses can
> use if they choose to.

OK, so we have generic_subsys_pm_ops.  Do we need anything beyond that?

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/