Am Sonntag, 1. Januar 2012, 03:21:45 schrieb Alan Stern: > On Sat, 31 Dec 2011, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > We are definitely going through do_unbind_rebind(). But I don't think > > it matters why we got there. We seem to be calling probe() too early. > > And we need to guarantee that a driver can request firmware in probe() > > > > So something has changed in the resume code path further up. > > For at least a year and a half, it has been true that rebinding takes Yes, so I don't understand why we haven't been hitting this issue all that time. > place during the complete phase of system resume. Clearly that is too > early to load firmware. When do you think we should do it instead? I think we ought to delay until right after user space is unfrozen. The devices are gone anyway, so we lose nothing but have the ability to call helpers. > And how should we keep track of which interfaces need rebinding? I guess this calls for a brute force approach. We can kick khubd and have it walk all busses checking for needs_binding. > P.S.: Oliver, it looks like there's a bunch of dead code in > usb_suspend_interface() and usb_resume_interface(). I don't see how > either one can be executed with a driver that doesn't have both suspend > and resume methods. Such cases should be filtered out when > usb_suspend() calls do_unbind_rebind(). The only odd thing that can > happen is when a driver doesn't support reset-resume. Do you agree? I agree. 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
