Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?

Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> Why a new flag?
> 
> For example, there are drivers that define .suspend() and .resume() which
> do not work correctly and we can use the flag to mark them.

Depending on how serious the problems with these .suspend/.resume()s
are, you could also put a printk in them or #if 0 bad_code #else return
-ENOSYS #endif around them.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
    • From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
  • Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
    • From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
  • Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
    • From: Tilman Schmidt <[email protected]>
  • Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
    • From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [patch 06/11] syslets: core, documentation
• Next by Date: Re: [patch 05/11] syslets: core code
• Previous by thread: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
• Next by thread: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]