Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC] Driver States

2005-04-08 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > > > You have a few things here that can easily conflict, and that will be > > > > developed at different paces. I like the direction that it's going, but > > > > how do you intend to do it gradually. I.e. what to do first? > > > > > > I think the first step would be for us to all agree

Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC] Driver States

2005-04-08 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! You have a few things here that can easily conflict, and that will be developed at different paces. I like the direction that it's going, but how do you intend to do it gradually. I.e. what to do first? I think the first step would be for us to all agree on a design,

Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC] Driver States

2005-04-06 Thread Adam Belay
On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 11:24 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > You have a few things here that can easily conflict, and that will be > > > developed at different paces. I like the direction that it's going, but > > > how do you intend to do it gradually. I.e. what to do first? > > > > I

Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC] Driver States

2005-04-06 Thread Adam Belay
On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 11:24 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: Hi! You have a few things here that can easily conflict, and that will be developed at different paces. I like the direction that it's going, but how do you intend to do it gradually. I.e. what to do first? I think the first

Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC] Driver States

2005-04-05 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! > > You have a few things here that can easily conflict, and that will be > > developed at different paces. I like the direction that it's going, but > > how do you intend to do it gradually. I.e. what to do first? > > I think the first step would be for us to all agree on a design, whether

Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC] Driver States

2005-04-05 Thread Pavel Machek
Hi! You have a few things here that can easily conflict, and that will be developed at different paces. I like the direction that it's going, but how do you intend to do it gradually. I.e. what to do first? I think the first step would be for us to all agree on a design, whether it be

Re: [RFC] Driver States

2005-03-29 Thread Patrick Mochel
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005, Adam Belay wrote: > Dynamic power management may require devices and drivers to transition > between various physical and logical states. I would like to start a > discussion on how these might be defined at the bus, driver, and class > levels. > Bus Level > = >

Re: [RFC] Driver States

2005-03-29 Thread Patrick Mochel
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005, Adam Belay wrote: Dynamic power management may require devices and drivers to transition between various physical and logical states. I would like to start a discussion on how these might be defined at the bus, driver, and class levels. snip Bus Level = At

[RFC] Driver States

2005-03-27 Thread Adam Belay
Dynamic power management may require devices and drivers to transition between various physical and logical states. I would like to start a discussion on how these might be defined at the bus, driver, and class levels. Bus Level = At the bus level, there are two state attributes, power

[RFC] Driver States

2005-03-27 Thread Adam Belay
Dynamic power management may require devices and drivers to transition between various physical and logical states. I would like to start a discussion on how these might be defined at the bus, driver, and class levels. Bus Level = At the bus level, there are two state attributes, power