[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1603221111040.1793-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 11:13:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>
cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lan78xx: Protect runtime_auto check by #ifdef CONFIG_PM
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-03-22 at 10:21 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > I don't see any point in resuming the device just in order to collect
> > operating statistics. If it was already suspended then it wasn't
> > operating, so there will be no statistics to collect.
>
> Indeed. In that case the point is moot. But it is correct to ask
> the core whether the device is autosuspended at that point rather
> than keep a private flag if you can.
That's why we have pm_runtime_status_suspended().
> All that is relevant only if the upper layers ask for information
> that the driver cannot provide without resuming the device.
> Those are fundamentally different issues.
Of course.
Alan Stern
Powered by blists - more mailing lists