[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <000001d14959$bb730790$325916b0$@emc.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:43:09 -0500
From: "Allen Hubbe" <Allen.Hubbe@....com>
To: "'Yu, Xiangliang'" <Xiangliang.Yu@....com>, <jdmason@...zu.us>,
<dave.jiang@...el.com>, <linux-ntb@...glegroups.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: "'SPG_Linux_Kernel'" <SPG_Linux_Kernel@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V2 0/3] Change notes of V2
> > In particular, I think we need feedback on #3 from PCI and power
> > management maintainers.
>
> I don't get your concern.
> I think we can add device attribute file to let application to trigger
> wakeup function, then NTB hardware will do the rest. NTB driver just
> need to implement suspend/resume interface of PCI PM.
>
> Add one more thing, do you think NTB should support runtime power
> management?
>
I think it is good to make the power management functionality available. In other words, yes, to your last question.
My concern is that I would like some degree of certainty that it is done right, in harmony with the rest of the kernel. I don't know what "done right" means in this case, which is why I would like someone else to review it. A smaller patch with only (and all of) the power management code will have a better chance of being reviewed.
I'm also concerned about the waiting behavior in #2 and #3. I'm not saying it's wrong. At least now that behavior is noted in the api documentation; thanks for that. If a PCI or power management expert has no objection to the waiting behavior in #3, then I would be comfortable with that behavior in #2 as well.
Allen
--
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