Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 19:47:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org> To: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: PERFORCE change 39284 for review Message-ID: <200310070247.h972lJQW091251@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=39284 Change 39284 by imp@imp_koguchi on 2003/10/06 19:46:55 update a little Affected files ... .. //depot/projects/power/notes#7 edit Differences ... ==== //depot/projects/power/notes#7 (text+ko) ==== @@ -51,14 +51,9 @@ # methods should be unique. Command interfaces to userland should dispatch # the right method. Otherwise we've reinvented ioctl :-) - convert to a model of suspending the device via device_suspend()/resume() - rather than detach()/attach() + rather than detach()/attach() for turning devices on/off. - This may require fixes to drivers so that they continue to function appropriately when their hardware has been suspended - # NO. This cannot be implemented reliably. pccard bridges do not tell - # us that a device has been removed while the system was asleep. That's - # why we detach/reattach on suspend/resume for devices on pccard/cardbus - # bridges. usb bridges can tell about this, and they properly use the - # suspend/resume functions. The second stage will be to make the powering off of devices more automated. This is still in early design stage. It may involve a powerd, it may
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200310070247.h972lJQW091251>