On Friday, June 23, 2017 02:13:57 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, June 23, 2017 06:30:35 AM Zheng, Lv wrote: > > Hi, Rafael > > > > [cut] > > > > > > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/ec.c > > > =================================================================== > > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/ec.c > > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/ec.c > > > @@ -1835,7 +1835,7 @@ static int acpi_ec_suspend(struct device > > > struct acpi_ec *ec = > > > acpi_driver_data(to_acpi_device(dev)); > > > > > > - if (ec_freeze_events) > > > + if (acpi_sleep_no_ec_events() && ec_freeze_events) > > > acpi_ec_disable_event(ec); > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > I just notice a slight pontential issue. > > Should we add a similar change to acpi_ec_stop()? > > Yes, it looks like that, thanks! Actually, no, I don't think so, because acpi_ec_block_transactions() is not used for suspend-to-idle, but I need a separate variable for that, because pm_suspend_via_firmware() also returns "false" for hibernation. Thanks, 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
