linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/2] i2c: prepare runtime PM support for I2C client devices

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130912220138.GY29403@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 12 Sep 2013 23:01:38 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>
Cc:	Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/2] i2c: prepare runtime PM support for I2C
 client devices

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 02:07:48PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:

> IMO, this decision belongs to the PM domain, not to the core.  We have
> an established legacy with the current core default (auto) and changing
> that means lots of breakage.

Yup.

> The "forbid by default" can just as easily be handled in the PM domain
> for the group of devices that need it, so why not do it there?

Or at the device level - I'd guess most I2C devices won't end up in a
domain outside of ACPI.  Mika's latest version of the patches address
this issue, the default is left alone.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)