Hi. On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 16:56 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > Does ..._ext_... mean extended? (external?) If 'extended' (or if not), > > > does that imply that they're mutually exclusive alternatives for drivers > > > to use? > > > > 'ext' means 'extended'. The idea is that the 'extended' version will be used > > by bus types / driver types that don't need to implement the _noirq callbacks. > > Something's wrong here. This seems to say that the "extended" version > has _fewer_ method pointers -- in which case it should be called > "restricted" instead. Agreed. > > > So drivers can never validly fail to resume. That sounds fair enough. If > > > the hardware has gone away while in lower power mode (USB, say), should > > > the driver then just printk an error and return success? > > > > I think so. > > > > IMO, an error code returned by a driver's ->resume() should mean "the device > > hasn't resumed and is presumably dead". Otherwise, ->resume() should return > > success. > > If the device is gone, it doesn't much matter what resume() returns. What if the same driver is handling multiple instances and only some of them fail to resume? Regards, Nigel _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
