Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1672401 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 0/6] PM: Unify the handling of device wakeup settings

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH 0/6] PM: Unify the handling of device wakeup settings Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> - 2017-06-22 10:30 +0200

#1672401 — Re: [PATCH 0/6] PM: Unify the handling of device wakeup settings

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:31:58PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> The handling of device wakeup settings, especially in the ACPI core and the PCI
> bus type, depends on whether it is about system wakeup from sleep states or
> remote wakeup in the working state (runtime).  However, that distinction is
> mostly based on the ACPI concept of "wakeup" and "runtime" GPEs, which is
> somewhat artificial, because the underlying hardware mechanism is basically
> the same in both cases.
> 
> Moreover, suspend-to-idle is now supported as a sleep state and wakeup from it
> is based on exactly the same hardware capabilities as the working-state
> (runtime) remote wakeup.
> 
> The following patch series removes that distinction and unifies the handling of
> device wakeup settings between system sleep and runtime.  It also fixes one
> issue related to wakeup signaling through PCI bridges.
> 
> [1/6]: Get rid of the "runtime wakeup" concept from the ACPI core.
> [2/6]: Unify device wakeup settings code paths in the ACPI core.
> [3-4/6]: Unify device wakeup settings code paths in the PCI bus type code.
> [5/6]: Fix wakeup-related issue with bridges in the PCI bus type code.
> [6/6]: Get rid of the "runtime wakeup" concept from the driver core.
> 
> The series is based on current linux-next and will be made available for
> testing in the linux-pm.git tree in a couple of days.

Apart from that one minor comment, this looks good to me. I'm happy that
we get rid of those run_wake things which I always find really
confusing :)

For the whole series,

Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web