On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 05:42:30AM -0400, Jed Davis wrote:
> Jed Davis <jdev@panix.com> writes:
> 
> > The xbd_suspend and xbd_resume functions are dead code at the moment,
> > but won't stay that way.
> 
> Hm.  I'm going to wind up with all permutations of
> {xbd,xennet,clock,evtchn,ctrl_if}_{suspend,resume}, and at least the
> clock ones don't have an obvious header file for the subsystem, and
> nothing outside the suspend handler should have any reason to touch
> any of them (not counting use from the same module due to common
> code).  So I'm wondering if they should get their own header, or what.

I'd prefer to see the suspend handlers in the subsystem's respetive headers.
For clock, it probably means you need a new header.

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--