Re: Runtime PM for PCI-based USB host controllers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thursday 27 May 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > On Wednesday 26 May 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Wed, 26 May 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > 
> > > > At this point, yes.  At least drivers should leave the devices active and
> > > > let the core power take care of them.
> > > 
> > > What if the driver is unbound while the device is suspended?  It seems 
> > > pretty awkward.  The release method would have to do:
> > > 
> > > 	pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
> > > 	pm_runtime_disable(dev);
> > > 	pm_runtime_set_suspended(dev);
> > > 	pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
> > 
> > That's correct, but as I said I don't think it's safe to do anything else in
> > general at this point (please remember that it must cooperate with system
> > suspend/resume).
> > 
> > This still is a work in progress, though, so if you have an idea how to improve
> > it, I surely won't object. :-)
> 
> I'm just trying to determine what drivers are currently expected to 
> do.
> 
> So when a device isn't bound, it should be disabled for runtime PM and
> in an active state (D0), but its runtime status should be RPM_SUSPENDED
> -- the same as the default values when a new device structure is
> initialized.  Right?

Yes.

Rafael
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ACPI]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux