On Monday, September 27, 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> 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.
I applied the patch to suspend-2.6/linux-next.
Thanks,
Rafael
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
