Hi Ulf, > -----Original Message----- > From: Ulf Hansson [mailto:ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 11:10 AM > To: Alex Lemberg > Cc: Avi Shchislowski; linux-mmc; Chris Ball > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: sleep notification > > [...] > > >> > Also, I think we need to clarify one more point for this patch: > >> > As was mentioned in commit message - Sleep_Notification can be > >> > interrupted > >> by HPI. > >> > This allows not blocking the host during the Sleep_Notification > >> > busy time and allows accepting requests coming during this stage. > >> > Thus, without having HPI supported, suspend/resume process might be > >> > influenced by Sleep_Notification busy time, and this should not > >> > happen - > >> suspend/resume should be done in very fast and not blocking manner. > >> > >> I fail to understand your comment here. > >> > >> Please tell me at what point(s) your think it make sense to issue the > >> SLEEP_NOTIFICATION? If that is during the suspend phase, then a HPI > >> request can't be triggered. > > > > I think SLEEP_NOTIFICATION should be issued on mmc_pm_notify() call, > > on PM_SUSPEND_PREPARE case. > > So, exactly why is that to prefer, comparing doing it in system PM > ->suspend() callback? Assuming that SLEEP_NOTIFICATION may take time (defined in SLEEP_NOTIFICATION_TIME byte in EXT_CSD [216]), I think it is better to send it from pm notifier - mmc_pm_notify(). > > Kind regards > Uffe ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��i��)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
