On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 5:30 AM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 16 Dec 2011, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> > Should these calls be pm_runtime_put_sync() instead of >> > pm_runtime_put()? >> >> I don't see why... The thing failed, it's not going to be used any >> more so better let PM deactivate the device. > > It's not a big deal. The difference is that pm_runtime_put_sync() > avoids an extra context switch when suspending the device. A minor > optimization, that's all. Ok, I used what most of the code was using, but I've trusted you and updated the patches. It would probably make sense to do the same in other places. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
