[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5a7d8e4c-2ef3-6cc2-133e-ff38e148648d@synopsys.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 02:07:06 +0000
From: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>
To: Elson Serrao <quic_eserrao@...cinc.com>,
Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>,
"balbi@...nel.org" <balbi@...nel.org>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"quic_wcheng@...cinc.com" <quic_wcheng@...cinc.com>,
"quic_jackp@...cinc.com" <quic_jackp@...cinc.com>,
"quic_mrana@...cinc.com" <quic_mrana@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: Add function wakeup support
On 8/11/2022, Elson Serrao wrote:
>
>>
>> 3) If the link transitions to U0 after the device triggering a remote
>> wakeup, the device will also send device notification function wake for
>> all the interfaces armed with remote wakeup.
>>
>
> I am not clear on why device notification function wake should be sent
> for ALL interfaces armed with remote wakeup. Since function
> suspend/wakeup of an interface is independent of other functions in a
> composite device only the interface in which a remote wakeup event
> occurred should send the wake notification right? The other functions
> will continue to remain
> in function suspend state.
>
hm... I think you're right here. I think I misread the spec.
We only need to send device notification of the function that triggers
remote wake.
You can ignore the comments related to this. Sorry for the confusion.
However, the other points still stand.
Thanks,
Thinh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists