lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and hibernation callbacks (rev. 6)
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Oliver Neukum wrote:

> Am Mittwoch, 2. April 2008 17:13:11 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > Basically yes.  Subsystems and drivers are allowed to keep devices
> > suspended if they were suspended before the system went to sleep.  
> > Remember, the purpose of the resume method is to let drivers know that
> > the system is now awake, not to force them to put their devices into a
> > high-power state.
>
> Well, sometimes it is exactly that what we desire, eg. as a side effect
> of lsusb. Should the callbacks have different semantics depending on
> the reason you call them? And how should that information be transferred?

Which callbacks are you referring to? When lsusb opens a device and
does an autoresume, it does not call the same routine as the PM core
does when resuming from a system sleep. lsusb ends up calling
usb_autoresume_device() whereas the PM core ends up calling
usb_resume(), which is the function you quoted earlier.

Alan Stern

--
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-02 18:45    [W:0.204 / U:0.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site