Hi.

On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 21:02 +0000, Alan wrote:
quoted text
> > > "If the device requires that, implement .suspend and .resume or at least
> > > define .suspend that will always return -ENOSYS (then people will know they
> > > have to unload the driver before the suspend).  Similarly, if you aren't sure
> > > whether or not the device requires .suspend and .resume, define .suspend that
> > > will always return -ENOSYS."
> > 
> > Sounds ok to me. Where should this text go?
> > Documentation/SubmittingDrivers ?
> 
> And testing/submitting drivers, perhaps with additional text in that to
> make it clear we want suspend/resume support or good excuses
> 
> "Please verify your driver correctly handles suspend and resume. If it
> does not your patch submission is likely to be suspended and only resume
> when the driver correctly handles this feature"

Maybe make it explicit that testing should be done for both suspend to
ram and to disk, and with the following usage scenarios as applicable?

- built in;
- modular, loaded while suspending but not loaded prior to resume from
disk;
- modular, loaded while suspending and loaded prior to resume from disk;

Regards,

Nigel

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/