On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Ming Lei wrote:
> 2010/9/27 Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 tom.leiming@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> >> From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> Commit 5789bdd542c6bfbb662915c67bffc14198aa5dda
> >> [PM / Runtime: Implement autosuspend support] introduces
> >> "autosuspend" facility for runtime PM, but misses
> >> helper function of pm_request_autosuspend, so add it.
> >
> > I didn't add the helper function because I couldn't think of any
> > places where it would be needed. Do you have an example?
>
> I add the helper function since there are the function descriptions
> more than more in the documentation file of runtime_pm.txt, so I
> think it is missed.
>
> >
> >> --- a/include/linux/pm_runtime.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/pm_runtime.h
> >> @@ -164,6 +164,11 @@ static inline int pm_request_resume(struct device *dev)
> >> return __pm_runtime_resume(dev, RPM_ASYNC);
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static inline int pm_request_autosuspend(struct device *dev)
> >> +{
> >> + return __pm_runtime_suspend(dev, RPM_ASYNC | RPM_AUTO);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> static inline int pm_runtime_get(struct device *dev)
> >> {
> >> return __pm_runtime_resume(dev, RPM_GET_PUT | RPM_ASYNC);
> >>
> >
> > This isn't good enough. If you provide the function then you have to
> > update the documentation file too.
>
> You have updated the documentation file already in your patch, :-)
Oops! You're right. My mistake, I apologize. Guess I changed my mind
about it and then forgot partway through. :-)
Yes, the function should be added.
Alan Stern
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
