On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 01:57:14PM +0200, Octavian Purdila wrote:
> @@ -753,11 +759,42 @@ static const struct usb_device_id dln2_table[] = {
>
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(usb, dln2_table);
Place the new callbacks above the device id table.
> +static int dln2_suspend(struct usb_interface *iface, pm_message_t message)
> +{
> + struct dln2_dev *dln2 = usb_get_intfdata(iface);
> +
> + dln2_stop(dln2);
You should also stop the reads urbs here.
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int dln2_resume(struct usb_interface *iface)
> +{
> + struct dln2_dev *dln2 = usb_get_intfdata(iface);
> +
> + dln2->disconnect = false;
And surely you need to resubmit the read urbs in resume, or you will
never receive any more data.
How did you test this patch?
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int dln2_reset_resume(struct usb_interface *iface)
> +{
> + struct dln2_dev *dln2 = usb_get_intfdata(iface);
> + int ret;
> +
> + dln2_free_rx_urbs(dln2);
> + ret = dln2_setup_rx_urbs(dln2, iface->cur_altsetting);
This doesn't make much sense. Why would you ever want to reallocate the
urbs and their buffers here?
If the device does not lose its state as you claim, then all you need to
do is to resubmit the read urbs (as in resume).
Johan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
