[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110628235643.4cf7cff0@tom-ThinkPad-T410>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 23:56:43 +0800
From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] PM: Limit race conditions between runtime PM and
system sleep
Hi Rafael,
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 00:56:31 +0200
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> Index: linux-2.6/Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt
> +++ linux-2.6/Documentation/power/runtime_pm.txt
> @@ -567,6 +567,11 @@ this is:
> pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> pm_runtime_enable(dev);
>
> +The PM core always increments the run-time usage counter before calling the
> +->suspend() callback and decrements it after calling the ->resume() callback.
> +Hence disabling run-time PM temporarily like this will not cause any run-time
> +suspend callbacks to be lost.
Could you explain why the above is that "this will not cause any run-time suspend
callbacks to be lost"?
Looks like it should be "this will not cause any run-time suspend callbacks to
be called", but not sure.
thanks,
--
Ming Lei
--
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