Re: [RFC] New Driver Model for 2.5

[Alan Cox]

> >The device tree is for _device_ suspend, not for "subsystem suspend". The
> >SCSI subsystem is a piece of cr*p, but even if it was perfect it should
> >never get involved with the act of suspension.
> 
> I agree I'd like subsystems to avoid polluting the PM tree (or device tree).
> If there are a few cases where a subsystem needs to know a driver it's using
> is asleep, it's probably up to the interface of this susbystem to provide
> a function to be called by the driver when it's going to suspend mode.

I don't think it is a big problem. We can add virtual nodes. They way I
see it we either
	a) put in grungy subsystem hacks
	b) register virtual device nodes for subsystems when needed

b feels cleaner

> I really don't think it's _that_ difficult to properly do this blocking.
> For things like sound drivers, a simple semaphore is plenty enough. For

Sound is more easily handled by not blocking user space but waiting until
the final IRQ off moment and grabbing the registers. That avoids a lot
of ugly locking gunge. It literally comes down to

	case suspending
		kmalloc buffer
		done
	case final suspend point
		turn off DMA
		readl
		readl
		readl
		readl
		...
		done