On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:44:24PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Thursday 26 July 2012 18:05:24 Aaron Lu wrote:
> > If the device is using autosuspend, when scsi_autopm_put_device is
> > called for it, use autosuspend runtime pm calls instead of the sync
> > call.
>
> What is the purpose of this approach?
The purpose is to let scsi layer driver(sd, sr, etc.) use the same pm
api(scsi_autopm_put_device) to put the device to runtime suspended
state.
When the device is ready to be suspended, if it does not make use of
autosuspend, call pm_runtime_put_sync for it; if it makes use of
autosuspend, call the autosuspend runtime pm apis for it.
> You need a very good reason to have an API do two different things
> based on this.
If you see the above reason not good, I'll prepare an updated version
to create a new api to cover the autosuspend case, something like:
void scsi_autopm_put_device_autosuspend(struct scsi_device *sdev)
{
pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(&sdev->sdev_gendev);
pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(&sdev->sdev_gendev);
}
Does this look right?
Thanks,
Aaron
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
