Re: [PATCH 5] PM: Update comments describing device power managementcallbacks

[Alan Stern]

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> > The same data structure (dev_pm_ops) is used for both drivers and
> > subsystems.  Therefore the comments should be directed toward both
> > driver writers and subsystem writers.
> 
> I don't quite agree.  Trying to do so would turn that comment into a lengthy
> document and there's no room for anything like that in the header file.

That's a good point.

> Perhaps I'll just modify the comment to say when the callbacks are executed
> without specifying what the specific callbacks are supposed to do (because
> that may vary from one subsystem to another and even between different
> drivers belonging to the same subsystem).  If PM domains are taken into
> account, it gets even more complicated.

Yes, a minimal description would be good, along with a pointer to the 
Documentation/power files.

> > It won't be moot if you add the sentences I recommend above.  You could
> > add an additional sentence: "Either way, the @freeze() and
> > @freeze_noirq() callbacks (both the subsystem's and the driver's)  
> > should always avoid changing the device's state."
> 
> That sounds good.

Actually I meant to write "avoid changing the device's power state".

Alan Stern

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/