[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100625084056.188ba96d@schatten.dmk.lab>
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:40:56 +0200
From: Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, mark gross <640e9920@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [update 2] Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Avoid losing wakeup events
during suspend
On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:09:27 -0400 (EDT)
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> > > This requires you to define an explicit PCI_WAKEUP_COOLDOWN delay. I
> > > think that's okay; I had to do something similar with USB and SCSI.
> > > (And I still think it would be a good idea to prevent workqueue threads
> > > from freezing until their queues are empty.)
I'm not that familiar with the freezer, but couldn't it be
deadlocky if the work depends on some already frozen part?
What about a new work-type that calls
pm_relax() after executing it's workfunction and executing
pm_stay_awake() on enqueue?
Cheers,
Flo
--
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