[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901201526510.5575@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:33:06 -0500 (EST)
From: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrey Borzenkov <arvidjaar@...l.ru>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: Fix suspend-resume of PCI USB controllers
> > Alan, does this look ok for you?
>
> There are a few things I don't like about it:
>
> In usb_hcd_pci_suspend, the failure path for
> pci_set_power_state doesn't undo all the changes
> that have already been made. In fact, the easiest
> way to do the rest of the recovery probably is to
> call usb_hcd_pci_resume directly.
>
> In the !has_pci_pm path we don't call pci_set_power_state.
> This means controllers with legacy power management won't
> get suspended. Maybe pci_set_power_state should be
> called always, and has_pci_pm be used only for
> interpreting the return code and printing debug messages.
>
> In usb_hcd_pci_resume, the pci_wake_from_d3 call
> should be moved up right next to the pci_enable_wake
> call. It makes no sense for them to be separated by
> pci_enable_device and pci_set_master. After all,
> even if you can't re-enable the device you probably
> don't want it to continue being a wakeup source.
>
> It's a little annoying that several debug messages
> in usb_hcd_pci_resume have been removed. Can't we
> display the power state upon entry, before trying to
> change it?
>
> It stands out that the resume method contains no call
> to match pci_set_power_state() in the suspend method.
> There should at least be a comment about it.
>
> Some of these problems predate Rafael's patch. Given that it has
> already helped a number of people, we might want to merge the patch
> and then make additional changes to address these issues.
Rafael's patch is required for upstream to resume on my T61.
Tested-by: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Perhaps Greg can apply Rafael's patch now to fix upstream ASAP,
while Alan prepares a 2nd patch to address his observations above?
thanks,
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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