On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 14:47 +0800, Gu Zheng wrote: > On 01/30/2013 04:31 PM, Paul Bolle wrote: > > 2) Regarding the errors I see at resume: it seems that if a device > > already exists when board_added() is called, this almost certainly means > > we're resuming with the same device we suspended with. So there's no > > reason to send errors to the log. > > No, It's hard to detect whether the existed device is the one you want to resume. > Maybe the existed device was added during suspend, and the one you really want to > resume was removed. Because the domain, bus, slot, and function being equal doesn't mean it's the same device? (I had to look up those names in man 8 lspci, I'm unfamiliar with all this.) Could an additional test on vendor ID and device ID help. Ie, if board_added() and friends notice a device already exists and the previous an current device have identical IDs, would we then know all that's needed to not bother to scare people with errors? Paul Bolle -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
