Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI: Rework default handling of suspend and resume

From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Sun Dec 07 2008 - 07:48:22 EST

On Sunday, 7 of December 2008, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 06, 2008 at 10:00:35AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >
> > > So, to fix the issue at hand, I'd like the $subject patch to go first. Then,
> > > there is a major update of the new framework waiting for .29 in the Greg's
> > > tree (that's the main reason why nobody uses it so far, BTW) and I'd really
> > > prefer it to go next. After it's been merged, I'm going to add the mandatory
> > > suspend-resume things (save state and go to a low power state on suspend,
> > > restore state on resume) to the new framework in a separete patch.
> > >
> > > Is this plan acceptable?
> >
> > Sounds good to me. And assuming Jesse/Greg are all aboard, I'll just wait
> > for the pull requests from Jesse and Greg.
> No objection from me, I'll wait for Jesse to "go first" in the .29 merge
> window.

Unfortunately, the merge of the $subject patch with the one in your tree
results in code that doesn't compile. Namely, some lines of code that the
$subject patch relies on are removed by the patch in your tree.

If there is no objection from Jesse and if you don't mind, I'll prepare a
version of the $subject patch on top of the patch in your tree and send it to

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at