Re: [rft]autosuspend for btusb

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

 



Hi Oliver,

>>>> Please explain the tx_in_flight stuff to me. It looks unneeded  
>>>> since we
>>>> anchor all TX URBs anyway.
>>>
>>> The completion of an URB may happen after the autosuspend timeout  
>>> passed.
>>> But we cannot use the pm counters as they are not accessible in  
>>> interrupt.
>>> Hence we must maintain a counter ourselves.
>>
>> Can we not just check the number of URBs in the anchor? I am against
>> just duplicating a counter, but then lets call it it what it is to  
>> make
>> it gets not misused. It is a purely a PM counter.
>>
>
> An excellent suggestion allowing major simplifications. This version  
> works
> for me. It required an extension of the anchor API, so it obsoletes
> the split-up you've done. Therefore the whole thing comes as a big  
> patch
> against rc4, easy to test.

I will break up the patch into pieces. However right now I am missing  
my beloved test machine since I am traveling. So everybody reporting  
success or failure would be nice.

Can you break out the USB anchor extensions and make sure they get  
merged into 2.6.28 in an early stage of the merge window. It really  
wanna get all of this stuff into the next kernel release. Finally we  
are getting somewhere with this driver and can kill the broken hci_usb.

Regards

Marcel

_______________________________________________
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