Hi, On Fri, Jan 01, 2010 at 07:55:27PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday 01 January 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote: > > Hi, > > > > While the bug report mentions "So it's just quirky hardware.", > > the implementation of your patch makes it seem like this delay attribute is > > totally "norm"al behaviour - I'm missing some more aggressive wording. > > That's because it works both ways (please look at the changelog). Ah, ok. > I know of a few devices that don't need the PCI-prescribed 10 ms wait when > going from D3 to D0 and their drivers may use the d3_delay field to actually > set a _shorter_ delay. Then why is the value lower-bounded by pci_pm_d3_delay (which, puzzlingly, was initialized to PCI_PM_D3_WAIT and thus 10 before, which the patch now removes!), in pci_dev_d3_sleep()? (and pci_pm_d3_delay is being quirked in drivers/pci/quirks.c only, to 120) Confused, Andreas Mohr _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
