On Monday 30 November 2009, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, 30 Nov 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Monday 30 November 2009, Alan Stern wrote: > > > This patch (as1308) fixes __pm_runtime_get(). Currently the routine > > > will resume a device if the prior usage count was 0. But this isn't > > > right; thanks to pm_runtime_get_noresume() the usage count can be > > > positive even while the device is suspended. > > > > > > Now the routine always tries to carry out a resume when called > > > synchronously. When called asynchronously, it avoids the overhead of > > > an unnecessary spinlock acquisition by doing the resume only if the > > > device's state was SUSPENDING or SUSPENDED. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > All three patches applied to suspend-2.6/linux-next. Do you want me to push > > them to Linus before 2.6.32, or perhaps the $subject one only? > > Thanks. The patches are not urgently needed; they can wait until the > merge window. > > BTW, I just noticed that the runtime_idle method is documented as > returning void but defined in pm.h as returning int. Obviously the > definition is wrong, since no return value is ever used. Would you > like to fix it? Yes, I'll fix it, thanks for chatching this! Best, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
