On Tuesday 30 May 2006 12:21 pm, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > @@ -1227,7 +1227,9 @@ static int generic_ide_suspend(struct de > > rq.special = &args; > > rq.pm = &rqpm; > > rqpm.pm_step = ide_pm_state_start_suspend; > > - rqpm.pm_state = state.event; > > + if (mesg.event == PM_EVENT_PRETHAW) > > + mesg.event = PM_EVENT_FREEZE; > > + rqpm.pm_state = mesg.event; > > > > Actually it would be nicer not to modify mesg.event... And perhaps I'd > move this check lower -- to be consistent with 'low level driver gets > full info' idea. Instead, it's consistent with the "smallest obviously correct patch" principle. Didn't want to end up overhauling IDE, especially since it doesn't seem to be a class where resume() does anything interesting. > (Or is it checked at too many places?) Notice that "rqpm.pm_state" confusion ... it's checked indirectly from there. Event codes are not states.
