Am 10.02.2007 07:43 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 07:25:34PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: >>>> On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 08:57 +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote: >>>>> Can we start to NAK new drivers that don't have proper power management >>>>> implemented? [...] >> Certainly we should ask for it, but it shouldn't be a merge-stopper. > > I think we should even proceed in the opposite direction : refuse to suspend > if at least one driver does not support the feature, and enumerate the > faulty drivers on the console. While I agree that a machine which resumes > in a bad state is not funny at all to debug, at least when the user expects > his notebook to suspend and sees that it refuses, he can complain about the > drivers which do not support it, and can even unload them first if unneeded. I agree wholeheartedly. That's the correct way to handle this. -- Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: [email protected] Bonn, Germany - In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- References:
- NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- From: Willy Tarreau <[email protected]>
- NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- Prev by Date: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- Next by Date: What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- Previous by thread: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- Next by thread: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- Index(es):
 |