Am Montag, 14. April 2008 05:23:00 schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt: > > > To avoid breaking things (from the functional point of view) unnecessarily. > > > > In short, I don't really see the difference between moving ->prepare() before > > the freezer and droppig the freezer, which I'm not going to do right now. > > I believe the use of prepare for things like request_firmware etc... is > worth the effort of fixing the known breakage of not having the freezer > while preventing insertion of new devices (mostly USB). In fact, it > won't be such a big issue as the core should/will return an error from > attempting to add the device in that case. Which is the problem. Suspension is supposed to be transparent. We cannot start returning error codes for operations which never failed in practice (eg. switching configurations in USB), just because the system is about to be suspended. If you want to request firmware in a PM callback, which makes a certain sense, as we should move to a comprehensive API, if we change the API at all, we need a model with 3 callbacks. Regards Oliver _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
