On Fri, 27 Jun 2014, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 04:11:35PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Jun 2014, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > > > One side point: The patch changes the string displayed for the > > > > power/runtime_status attribute file when disable_depth > 0. Instead of > > > > "unsupported", it will now say "disabled". The attribute will contain > > > > "not supported" when the new flag is set. > > > > > > > > Is this acceptable? > > > > > > Why change the "unsupported" string? Can't we just leave that one > > > alone? I'd prefer to not break userspace tools... > > > > I changed it because it's wrong. disable_depth > 0 means that runtime > > PM has temporarily been disabled, or was never enabled in the first > > place. It doesn't mean that runtime PM is unsupported. > > > > In fact, the word "unsupported" is ambiguous. Does it mean unsupported > > by the hardware or unsupported by the kernel? The hardware can't > > change, but the kernel can be altered by loading a module. > > > > If that change is too intrusive, I can remove it from the patch. > > Do you know of any tools that actually look at these files?
I don't. Of course, that doesn't mean much. > If there isn't any, then we can try to change it and see who screams :) It'll be a learning experience... Alan Stern -- 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/
