Hi Rafael,
2011/7/2 Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday, June 30, 2011, [email protected] wrote:
...
>> @@ -462,6 +463,7 @@ struct dev_pm_info {
>> unsigned long accounting_timestamp;
>> void *subsys_data; /* Owned by the subsystem. */
>> #endif
>> + struct plist_head wakeup_lat_plist_head;
>> };
>
> Please use a better name. I mean, relly, the type implies that this is a
> plist head, so that doesn't need to appear in the field name too. Also,
> the name is confusing, because "wakeup" may mean a couple of different things
> and it's not entirely clear what "lat" stands for. So, I'd prefer something
> like
>
> + struct plist_head latency_constraints;
>
> or perhaps you can invent something even better.
I am OK with your suggestion and I will update the naming.
>
>>
>> extern void update_pm_runtime_accounting(struct device *dev);
>>
>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
Thanks,
Jean
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
