Am Mittwoch 25 Februar 2009 22:15:33 schrieb Alan Stern: > On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Sarah Sharp wrote: > > Sure. I guess I don't see why selective suspend would be useless > > without remote wakeup. For example, my USB camera on my eeepc doesn't > > have remote wakeup, but it auto-suspends fine. When I'm not using it, I > > want it to be auto-suspended. > > I said "in many cases" selective suspend is useless without remote > wakeup. Consider a USB keyboard as a good example. The best. All other devices can do some power savings without remote wakeup. But they fare very badly. Mice eg. would require you to kill X (and gpm) to get power savings. HID is not very good, but I think I have gone to the limits of the specification with it. > > Ok, it sounds like I need some specific prompts to the user as to how > > they need to test their HID device. > > Or any device in general. Well, you can do some tests without user intervention. You can unbind drivers from a device, read the config strings and reprobe drivers. If this fails the device is broken. Unfortunately you cannot determine whether a device works without problems this way. But you really need to test remote wakeup separately. I expect trouble, especially with bluetooth. Regards Oliver -- 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
