[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0910311455520.31845@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:57:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Jose Marino <braket@...mail.com>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
Subject: Re: Help needed, Re: [Bug #14334] pcmcia suspend regression from
2.6.31.1 to 2.6.31.2 - Dell Inspiron 600m
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> Yes, there is, because socket_early_resume() only does it in
> the (skt->state & SOCKET_PRESENT) case. If that bit is not set, the
> initialization is entirely postponed.
Ahh, ok. And what's the reason for that? It seems like the
skt->socket = dead_socket;
skt->ops->init(skt);
skt->ops->set_socket(skt, &skt->socket);
thing should always be safe, whether there is something present or not.. ?
Linus
--
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