[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871uy1d380.fsf@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 17:29:35 -0700
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...e.de>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
Subject: Re: [Update][PATCH 6/10] PM / Domains: System-wide transitions support for generic domains (v5)
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> writes:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>
>
> Make generic PM domains support system-wide power transitions
> (system suspend and hibernation). Add suspend, resume, freeze, thaw,
> poweroff and restore callbacks to be associated with struct
> generic_pm_domain objects and make pm_genpd_init() use them as
> appropriate.
>
> The new callbacks do nothing for devices belonging to power domains
> that were powered down at run time (before the transition).
Thinking about this some more, how is a driver supposed to reconfigure
wakeups during suspend if it has already been runtime suspended?
For example, assume a device where device_may_wakeup() == false. This
means wakeups during *suspend* are disabled, but wakeups wakeups are
assumed to enabled when it is runtime suspended.
So now, assume this device is RPM_SUSPENDED, it has wakeups *enabled*,
and then system suspend comes along.
With this current patch, the driver will never receive any callbacks, so
it can never disable its wakeups.
Am I missing something?
Kevin
--
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