Am Montag, 10. Oktober 2011, 16:38:02 schrieb Matthew Garrett: > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 04:34:38PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > Am Montag, 10. Oktober 2011, 16:16:35 schrieb Matthew Garrett: > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 04:06:37PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > > > > > This is odd, because the hardware shouldn't generate remote wakeups unless you > > > > request them, like this (usbhid) > > > > > > I thought needs_remote_wakeup was a hint to the kernel that remote > > > wakeup ability was required for the hardware to autosuspend? In theory I > > > > It fulfills that role, but it is not its sole function. > > > > > guess it should be set, but in practice all the hardware supported by > > > this driver generates them so it'd be a noop. No objection to adding it > > > in the name of correctness (or if some future version is broken, I > > > guess...), though. > > > > It is used in usb_port_suspend in form of do_remote_wakeup which > > is computed from it. And we send a real control message. > > do_remote_wakeup will be set if device_may_wakeup is true, regardless of > whether the driver asks for it. Or am I misreading choose_wakeup()? Indeed things have changed. Arguably this raises power consumption. Anyway, you ought to set it so usbcore will refuse should remote wakeup fail to be enabled. Regards Oliver -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
