On Mon, 22 Jun 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > And of course, synchronous pm_runtime_resume should always increment the > > counter. > > Sure. Now that I've thought about it some more, I decided that we might want to be more flexible. Without subjecting you to the entire line of reasoning, let's just say that I'm starting to wonder whether it's such a good idea to tie the counter increments to the PM core runtime resume calls at all. Maybe it would be better (easier to use, less constraining) to require the runtime_resume callback to do its own pm_runtime_get. That way the driver would be entirely responsible for managing the usage counter; the PM core wouldn't be involved. pm_runtime_get would simply increment the counter, so it could be used even in interrupt context. At the moment, I don't see any need for it to queue an autoresume request if the device happens to be suspended. Something like this was probably your intention all along. :-) Alan Stern _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
