[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200803062330.28639.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 23:30:27 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make PM core handle device registrations concurrent with suspend/hibernation
On Thursday, 6 of March 2008, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > > > Well, can it happen in practice? If it can, then what way can it happen?
> > >
> > > Yes, it can happen in practice when a new module is loaded. In some
> > > ways, modules' init routines are like probe methods.
> >
> > Hmm, I'm not sure if it really is possible to load a module when all devices
> > have been suspended. Never mind, though.
>
> You can load the module before devices are suspended, and then its init
> routine can run while the suspend is starting.
Yeah.
> > > To be safe, I think we should make system sleep mutually exclusive with
> > > module loading.
> >
> > Okay, is the (yet another) version of the patch below fine by you?
>
> Yes, it's fine. Mutual exclusion with module loading can be added
> later. (Ironically, it may require putting pm_sleep_rwsem back!)
I'm going to send this patch and the "include dpm_sysfs_add() into
device_pm_add()" patch for -mm/linux-next testing, if you don't mind.
I'm working on a new version of the "PM: Separate suspend and hibernation
callbacks" patch, on top of the two.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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