On Tue, 13 May 2014, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > + dev->power.direct_complete = ret > 0 && state.event == PM_EVENT_SUSPEND > > > + && pm_runtime_suspended(dev); > > > > Shouldn't the flag be set under the spinlock? > > I guess you're worried about runtime PM flags being modified in parallel to > this? But we've just done the barrier a while ago, so is that still a concern > here? A wakeup request from the hardware could cause a runtime resume to occur at this time. The barrier wouldn't prevent that. It's unlikely, I agree, but not impossible. 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
