[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1715416.hWBvT0iLvO@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 23:46:32 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>
Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
dm-devel@...hat.com, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] PM suspend/hibernate: Call notifier after freezing processes
On Monday, July 20, 2015 09:32:26 AM Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Saturday 18 July 2015 01:27:15 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, July 16, 2015 09:33:02 AM Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > On Thursday 16 July 2015 03:02:03 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > Also, if you're adding AFTER_FREEZE, it would be good to add BEFORE_THAW too
> > > > for symmetry.
> > > >
> > >
> > > But there is no use case for BEFORE_THAW. At least it is not needed for now.
> >
> > For your use case, a single function pointer would be sufficient too.
> >
>
> What do you mean by single function pointer? kernel/power is part of
> kernel image and dm-crypt is external kernel module.
Well, if there is a function pointer in the core suspend code initially set to
NULL and exported to modules such that the dm-crypt code can set it to
something else, that should be sufficient, shouldn't it?
So if you're adding new PM notifier events, that's already more than *you* need.
Anyway, I guess the "post freeze" new one should be enough for now, but please
change the name to POST_FREEZE.
Also I think we don't need separate "post freeze" events for suspend and
hibernation.
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