On Tuesday, September 28, 2010, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Monday, September 27, 2010, Alan Stern wrote: > > > On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: ... > Given this, I see no point in adding a special per-call flag. > > There's another advantage to using a per-device flag. Not all resume > calls are initiated by the driver; the PM core has to start a resume on > its own when rpm_resume sees that the device's parent is suspended. > When this happens, the nested resume can be carried out with interrupts > disabled if the parent's driver supports it -- and the PM core won't > know that unless there's a flag for it in dev_pm_info. OK, go for it, then. Thanks, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
