Re: Messing up driver model API

From: Pavel Machek (
Date: Thu Jun 12 2003 - 05:41:42 EST


> > So you just had to mess it up... Having suspend(device *, state,
> > level) might be bad, but having suspend(device *, state, level) in one
> > piece of code and {suspend,save}(device *, state) is *way* worse. (And
> > I did not see any proposal on l-k. I hope I just missed it).
> Calm down, Pavel. From a technical standpoint, it's a superior
> interface.

>From a technical standpoint, its now mess with half a kernel using one
interface and second one using another. And you did not bother to mail
the patch to l-k for the review :-(, and then you call me a troll.

> > So are you going to revert it or convert whole driver model to use
> > {suspend,save}(device *, state)?
> Today: neither. I'm going to see how this works, and if it does, then I
> may convert all the users of struct device_driver to use the same
> model.

So we are stuck with the mess in 2.6; not good.


When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 15 2003 - 22:00:31 EST