On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, October 29, 2010, Kevin Winchester wrote: > > GCC version 4.5.1 gives the following warning: > > > > drivers/base/power/runtime.c: In function â??rpm_check_suspend_allowedâ??: > > drivers/base/power/runtime.c:146:25: warning: comparison between â??enum dpm_stateâ?? and â??enum rpm_statusâ?? > > > > which seems to be a typo in that dev->power.runtime_status > > should be compared instead of dev->power.status. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Winchester <kjwinchester@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/base/power/runtime.c | 2 +- > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c > > index 126ca49..02c652b 100644 > > --- a/drivers/base/power/runtime.c > > +++ b/drivers/base/power/runtime.c > > @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int rpm_check_suspend_allowed(struct device *dev) > > > > /* Pending resume requests take precedence over suspends. */ > > else if ((dev->power.deferred_resume > > - && dev->power.status == RPM_SUSPENDING) > > + && dev->power.runtime_status == RPM_SUSPENDING) > > || (dev->power.request_pending > > && dev->power.request == RPM_REQ_RESUME)) > > retval = -EAGAIN; > > Ouch, this actually is a serious bug. Yes indeed. I should have caught it while reviewing the patch. A quick check shows there are no other similar typos. > Thanks a lot for the fix, will push to Linus shortly. > > Rafael Alan Stern _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
