On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Freitag, 27. November 2009 18:43:12 schrieb Alan Stern: > > > But the resume method in the driver doesn't learn. It is an extrem hassle > > > not to know whether you are called synchronously (ie from open which > > > already holds a lock) or asynchronously (which means you need to guard > > > against open) > > > > With the new Runtime PM framework, there isn't always a one-to-one > > correspondence between resume requests and method callbacks. So the > > "reason" for a callback isn't always well defined. And even if it > > were, the callback might happen in a different thread from the request. > > That is exactly what I need to know. > > > The way to guard against open from an asynchronous context is to > > approach the problem the other way around: Guard against async contexts > > while open is running. In other words, have open do an autoresume. > > That is the problem locking requirements are different when I do that > and I don't know what's the case. What are the details? Alan Stern _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
