On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote: > 2010/4/23 Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Thu, 22 Apr 2010, [UTF-8] Arve Hjønnevåg wrote: > ... > >> +Calling suspend_block when the suspend blocker is active or suspend_unblock when > >> +it is not active has no effect. This allows drivers to update their state and > >> +call suspend suspend_block or suspend_unblock based on the result. > > > > But suspend_block() and suspend_unblock() don't nest. You should > > mention this. > > > > I'm not sure what you mean by this? I think the first sentence > dictates nesting is not supported. That fact is implicit from the first sentence. Mentioning it _explicitly_ will help people to understand more easily. You don't have to add much; a parenthetical remark would be enough: Calling suspend_block when the suspend blocker is active or suspend_unblock when it is not active has no effect (i.e., these functions don't nest). This allows drivers to ... Alan Stern _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
