Hi.
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 16:56 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
quoted text > On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > > Does ..._ext_... mean extended? (external?) If 'extended' (or if not),
> > > does that imply that they're mutually exclusive alternatives for drivers
> > > to use?
> >
> > 'ext' means 'extended'. The idea is that the 'extended' version will be used
> > by bus types / driver types that don't need to implement the _noirq callbacks.
>
> Something's wrong here. This seems to say that the "extended" version
> has _fewer_ method pointers -- in which case it should be called
> "restricted" instead.
Agreed.
quoted text > > > So drivers can never validly fail to resume. That sounds fair enough. If
> > > the hardware has gone away while in lower power mode (USB, say), should
> > > the driver then just printk an error and return success?
> >
> > I think so.
> >
> > IMO, an error code returned by a driver's ->resume() should mean "the device
> > hasn't resumed and is presumably dead". Otherwise, ->resume() should return
> > success.
>
> If the device is gone, it doesn't much matter what resume() returns.
What if the same driver is handling multiple instances and only some of
them fail to resume?
Regards,
Nigel
--
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/
Messages in current thread:
Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and hib... , Nigel Cunningham , (Tue Apr 1, 5:38 pm)