Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: pci_set_power_state() failure and breaking suspend | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Wed, 25 Oct 2006 08:40:16 +1000 |
| |
On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 13:41 +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: > Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > Well, the question is wether we want to make the whole machine suspend > > fail because there is a 1394 chip that doesn't do PCI PM in or not... > > > > I can send patches "fixing" it both ways (just ignoring the result from > > pci_set_power_state in general, or just ignoring that result on Apple > > cells). > > Yes, what would be the correct way to do this? And if it the latter > option, should that be implemented in ohci1394 or in pci_set_power_state? > > grep says that almost nobody checks the return code of > pci_set_power_state. But e.g. usb/core/hcd-pci.c does...
Yes, and I think that's bogus too ...
> (Side note: The sole function that ohci1394's suspend and resume hooks > fulfill right now in mainline is to change power consumption of the > chip. The IEEE 1394 stack as a whole does not survive suspend + resume > yet. A still incomplete solution is in linux1394-2.6.git.)
- 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/
| |