On Monday, 7 of January 2008, Johannes Berg wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > >> I don't see anything wrong with it. All that will happen is that the > >> removal will start before the suspend and finish after the resume. > > > > In that case, we'll attempt to call the device's .suspend() and .resume() > > routines, but we shouldn't do that, IMHO. > > I don't see anything wrong with that since the driver must be prepared to > handle that even in the regular case, it's the only thing you can > guarantee: no more method calls after removal finishes. Am I totally > misunderstanding things? Well, we are towards the end of device removal at this point, having called bus_remove_device(dev) for example, but still we've got it on dpm_active ... This may not be technically wrong (ie. we should be able to recover from that), but it seems conceptually wrong and with pm_sleep_rwsem in place it can be avoided. Rafael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
