From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Sebastian Capella <sebastian.capella@linaro.org>
Cc: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] PM / Hibernate: no kernel_power_off when pm_power_off NULL
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 21:54:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140415205453.GX24070@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADHgK6sCmPVZ--eyEnqnjfs_4C_PfHTgAUQ_Nb4oJP0mBDnQUw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:34:52AM -0700, Sebastian Capella wrote:
> Ping..
>
> There appears to be disagreement on the correct path to take on this.
>
> Pavel and Alan recommend that arm's machine_power_off shall never return
>
> Russell suggests hibernation be modified to handle machine_power_off
> returning; that x86 architecture (and others as well) can have
> machine_power_off returning.
>
> Discussions available at the links below:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/25/554 -- linux-arm discussion
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/20/649 -- linux-pm discussion
>
> Should I continue with the original hibernation patch from the
> linux-pm discussion?
>
> Does anyone have any response to Russel's commentsl?
What I'm basically saying is that I see no reason for ARM to do something
different to what x86 does.
What is pretty clear to me is that ARM is compatible with x86, which is
compatible with kernel/reboot.c, and it's the hibernate code which is
the odd one out.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly
improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-15 20:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-20 20:53 [PATCH RFC 0/1] PM / Hibernate: no kernel_power_off when pm_power_off Sebastian Capella
2014-03-20 20:53 ` [PATCH RFC] PM / Hibernate: no kernel_power_off when pm_power_off NULL Sebastian Capella
2014-03-20 21:23 ` Pavel Machek
2014-03-20 21:35 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-03-20 21:36 ` Sebastian Capella
2014-03-26 17:22 ` Sebastian Capella
2014-04-15 18:34 ` Sebastian Capella
2014-04-15 20:54 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2014-04-15 21:18 ` Pavel Machek
2014-04-16 16:28 ` Sebastian Capella
2014-04-16 20:41 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-04-16 20:57 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2014-04-16 21:09 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-04-18 21:38 ` Sebastian Capella
2014-04-20 14:06 ` Pavel Machek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140415205453.GX24070@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com \
--cc=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sebastian.capella@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®