Am Mittwoch, 21. Oktober 2009 19:16:29 schrieb Alan Stern: > > Just like that case, here the only modules which have all the knowledge > > to make an informed decision are the upper layer modules. > > This is, of course, correct. But the infrastructure for the higher > layers to signal us isn't in place yet. I was wondering if in the > meantime, we could implement a stopgap approach that wouldn't be 100% > right but would be better than nothing. It sounds seductive, but Matthew is right, it's not worth doing it twice. > Or should I just forget about it and work on implementing support for > the new runtime PM framework in both USB and SCSI? Do you need to do it for USB? It seems to me you could implement the hooks only for storage and use the new framework only for SCSI. This is not as nice, but faster to do and very little work to reverse and leads to a nicer migration path. 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
