[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH V2] au1xmmc: dev_pm_ops conversion
On Saturday 25 July 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > Was suspend to disk tested? It requires freeze()/thaw().
> > >
> > > Is that a regression introduced by this patch then? If so, many
> > > more of the recent dev_pm_ops conversion patches would need to be
> > > revisited.
> Yes, they would.  In general, you'd probably want to do something like
> this:
> static struct dev_pm_ops au1xmmc_pmops = {
>         .resume         = au1xmmc_resume,
>         .suspend                = au1xmmc_suspend,
>         .freeze         = au1xmmc_resume,
>         .thaw           = au1xmmc_suspend,
>         .restore                = au1xmmc_resume,
>         .poweroff       = au1xmmc_suspend,
> };
> but in this particular case it's probably better to define separate
> callbacks for .freeze() and .thaw() at least.
> During hibernation we call .freeze() and .thaw() before and after
> creating the image, respectively, and then .poweroff() is called right
> after the image has been saved.  During resume .freeze() is called
> after the image has been loaded and before the control goes to the
> image kernel, which then calls .restore().

Yes, I see that in drivers/base/platform.c (legacy) .suspend resp. .resume
also got called for those cases?
Ouch :-(

I've added others who've submitted dev_pm_ops patches in CC.

> I'll fix up the floppy and hp-wmi patches.

Note that those are already in mainline, as is pcspkr.

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-07-25 22:23    [W:0.068 / U:3.240 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site