On Thu, 8 Jun 2006, David Brownell wrote: > > A message whose source is USER or DRIVER should not be > > allowed to resume a device that was suspended by a message > > whose source was SYSTEM. In other words, runtime PM and > > autoresume should not interfere with a system sleep transition. > > Why wouldn't that be entirely the driver's responsibility, and > something they don't need API changes to achieve? Perhaps we don't need to worry about this. After all, in most cases it's impossible for a device which is suspended as part of a system-sleep transition to get either a runtime-PM resume or an autoresume request. It can only happen in situations where the system-sleep did not first freeze all tasks. In those situations people may agree that it is acceptable for the sleep transition to be aborted by a user request or an autoresume. If that is so then yes, we don't need to alter the PM message structures in this way. Alan Stern
