Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and hibernation callbacks (rev. 6)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux