[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200712101626.35491.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:26:34 -0700
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, matthew@....cx,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, drzeus@...eus.cx,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Adam Belay <ambx1@....rr.com>,
Matthieu Castet <castet.matthieu@...e.fr>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: PNP: do not stop/start devices in suspend/resume path
On Friday 07 December 2007 12:13:35 am Shaohua Li wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 02:24 +0800, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > Index: linux-mm/drivers/pnp/driver.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-mm.orig/drivers/pnp/driver.c 2007-11-30 13:58:25.000000000
> > -0700
> > +++ linux-mm/drivers/pnp/driver.c 2007-12-03 09:58:35.000000000
> > -0700
> > @@ -161,13 +161,6 @@
> > return error;
> > }
> >
> > - if (!(pnp_drv->flags & PNP_DRIVER_RES_DO_NOT_CHANGE) &&
> > - pnp_can_disable(pnp_dev)) {
> > - error = pnp_stop_dev(pnp_dev);
> > - if (error)
> > - return error;
> > - }
> > -
> > if (pnp_dev->protocol && pnp_dev->protocol->suspend)
> > pnp_dev->protocol->suspend(pnp_dev, state);
> > return 0;
> > @@ -177,7 +170,6 @@
> > {
> > struct pnp_dev *pnp_dev = to_pnp_dev(dev);
> > struct pnp_driver *pnp_drv = pnp_dev->driver;
> > - int error;
> >
> > if (!pnp_drv)
> > return 0;
> > @@ -185,12 +177,6 @@
> > if (pnp_dev->protocol && pnp_dev->protocol->resume)
> > pnp_dev->protocol->resume(pnp_dev);
> >
> > - if (!(pnp_drv->flags & PNP_DRIVER_RES_DO_NOT_CHANGE)) {
> > - error = pnp_start_dev(pnp_dev);
> > - if (error)
> > - return error;
> > - }
> > -
> I'd suggest keep pnp_start_dev here to prevent BIOS not or assign
> different resources after a resume.
The patch I currently have in -mm (http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/10/29/412)
merely requests resources in pnp_start_dev() and releases them in
pnp_stop_dev(). So if we remove pnp_stop_dev() but keep pnp_start_dev(),
I have to fix that patch to deal with things that may already be
reserved.
But I don't see any mention in the spec of running _SRS in the
sleep/wakup path, so I'm not convinced it's really necessary.
Section 7.4 mentions _TTS, _PTS, _GTS, etc., but not _SRS.
For devices, it looks like the intent is that BIOS should generate
notifications that cause OSPM to re-enumerate devices that might
have changed. I'm pretty sure Linux is missing some of that code,
though, so I could believe that _SRS might help paper over that
deficiency.
What I'd really like to do is figure out how Windows uses _SRS and
do the same thing.
Bjorn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists