Hi.
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 08:40 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 03:25:46PM +0300, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> > From: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Add power management related debugging into driver core. Make the
> > kernel complain if a device driver lacks bus and class support for
> > resume or if a PCI or USB driver does not have a driver specific
> > resume function.
> >
> > Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/base/core.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 6 ++++++
> > drivers/usb/core/driver.c | 6 ++++++
> > include/linux/device.h | 1 +
> > 4 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
> >
> > Index: 2.6/drivers/base/core.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- 2.6.orig/drivers/base/core.c 2007-04-27 14:42:13.000000000 +0300
> > +++ 2.6/drivers/base/core.c 2007-04-27 14:43:14.000000000 +0300
> > @@ -652,6 +652,18 @@ int device_add(struct device *dev)
> > class_intf->add_dev(dev, class_intf);
> > up(&dev->class->sem);
> > }
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> > + if (!((dev->class && dev->class->resume) ||
> > + (dev->bus && (dev->bus->resume || dev->bus->resume_early))) &&
> > + !dev->pm_safe) {
> > + printk(KERN_WARNING "Device driver %s lacks bus and class "
> > + "support for being resumed.\n",
> > + kobject_name(&dev->kobj));
> > + dump_stack();
> > + }
> > +#endif
>
>
> I think you are reporting the wrong thing here, we want to know about
> the busses and classes without suspend support, not the individual
> devices, right?
Yeah, I suppose you're right. I started off seeking to make a message
for each device lacking anything that would save its state. Guess I got
muddled somewhere :)
> And dumping stuff like this to the log for every bus/class isn't the
> nicest :(
>
>
> > +
> > Done:
> > kfree(class_name);
> > put_device(dev);
> > @@ -989,6 +1001,7 @@ struct device *device_create(struct clas
> > dev->class = class;
> > dev->parent = parent;
> > dev->release = device_create_release;
> > + dev->pm_safe = 1;
>
> I don't understand the use of this flag, it looks like it is only being
> set, which doesn't really make it very useful.
The use was above (!dev->pm_safe).
Regards,
Nigel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
