On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Montag, 7. Januar 2008 20:42:23 schrieb Alan Stern: > > When all the devices under a host are suspended, the LLD is informed > > (via a new "autosuspend" method in the host template) so that it can > > That is most certainly a mistake. Why? > Is there a good reason to not modify > to extend suspend() to take an extra argument for the reason it is called? In fact suspend methods already do take an argument specifying the reason they were called. It wouldn't be hard to add a couple of extra PM_EVENT_* values for manual suspend and autosuspend. The problem is that resume methods don't take a corresponding argument. Alan Stern - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
