Am Mittwoch, 26. März 2008 15:10:01 schrieb Alan Stern:
quoted text
> > > IMO you must always keep the ordering invariant. If a parent returns an error
> > > the PM core must not wake its children.
> 
> Don't think of it that way.  The PM core doesn't wake anything.  It
> merely notifies drivers that the system sleep is ending, so that the
> drivers can wake their devices.  It's up to the driver to detect
> whether the parent failed to resume, in which case the driver should
> take appropriate action.

How do you propose that every driver should check the power state
of its parent? Without locking the parent?

quoted text
> The situation is no different from what happens when the user tries to 
> access a mounted USB disk drive after the USB cable has been unplugged.  
> The drivers take care of everything.

That completely throws away the reason to have a PM core. We've made
a guarantee to drivers that they wil not be woken unless their parents are
awake. In fact the semantics of the callbacks are defined in a way that
adding devices to a parent can be enabled. You cannot add children to a
dead parent. It's the very reason for this rewrite.

	Regards
		Oliver
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/