Re: Re: Possible problem with device_move()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> > > Perhaps we should create dpm_active right before the suspend, by really
> > > traversing the device tree, when we own all device semaphores and no device
> > > objects can be added/removed?
> > 
> > We're doing okay the way things are.  Changing the order is more likely
> > to cause new problems than to solve existing ones.
> 
> Well, my idea is not to change the order, but to create the list from scratch
> when we need it and not in advance, because creating the list in advance
> causes problems to appear.

Doing it that way will almost certainly result in a different order 
from the one we have now.  And it won't help the EHCI issue, because 
there the question is which of several siblings should come last.

> In fact, if the system is never suspended, the list that we create is not even
> useful for anything.

True.  But it doesn't take up much space, especially if PM isn't 
configured.  And creating the list doesn't take much time.

Alan Stern

_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ACPI]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux