Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | [PATCH 0/2 v2] PM / Sleep: Simplify generic system suspend callbacks | Date | Thu, 15 Dec 2011 00:19:39 +0100 |
| |
Hi Everyone,
One more udate here.
I forgot about the comments in this patch:
On Saturday, December 10, 2011, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sunday, November 27, 2011, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> > > > > The pm_runtime_suspended() check in __pm_generic_call() doesn't > > really help and may cause problems to happen, because in some cases > > the system suspend callbacks need to be called even if the given > > device has been suspended by runtime PM. For example, if the device > > generally supports remote wakeup and is not enabled to wake up > > the system from sleep, it should be prevented from generating wakeup > > signals during system suspend and that has to be done by the > > suspend callbacks that the pm_runtime_suspended() check prevents from > > being executed. > > > > Similarly, it may not be a good idea to unconditionally change > > the runtime PM status of the device to 'active' in > > __pm_generic_resume(), because the driver may want to leave the > > device in the 'suspended' state, depending on what happened to it > > before the system suspend and whether or not it is enabled to > > wake up the system. > > > > For the above reasons, remove the pm_runtime_suspended() > > check from __pm_generic_call() and remove the code changing the > > device's runtime PM status from __pm_generic_resume(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
so the updated one becomes [1/2] in the new series.
In addition to that I noticed that __pm_generic_call() and __pm_generic_resume() may be merged after [1/2], which is done by [2/2].
I regard these patches as 3.3 material, if there are no objections.
Thanks, Rafael
| |