[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5460C7D3.10505@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 06:12:35 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Romain Perier <romain.perier@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/48] kernel: Add support for power-off handler call
chain
On 11/10/2014 12:33 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> Introduce a system power-off handler call chain to solve the described
>> problems. This call chain is expected to be executed from the architecture
>> specific machine_power_off() function. Drivers providing system power-off
>> functionality are expected to register with this call chain. By using the
>> priority field in the notifier block, callers can control power-off
>> handler
>
> Linus rather disliked the idea of notifier chains for this... And I
> don't see how it got addressed.
>
As I understand, Linus primarily disliked the idea of callbacks, which is
what the code does, only with no order or protection against race conditions.
Frankly I have no idea how to solve the power-off problem without callbacks.
If you have one, please let me know.
Guenter
--
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