Re: [PATCH] PM: use pm_op methods for device types

[Greg KH]

On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 09:56:55AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2008, Greg KH wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:27:02PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thursday, 25 of September 2008, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > This patch (as1141) adds code to use the device type's pm_op methods,
> > > > if they are defined.  It fixes a regression in the USB PM code; the
> > > > various suspend and resume methods are defined in the device type
> > > > rather than in the bus, because USB devices have to be handled
> > > > differently from USB interfaces.  Without the patch, those methods
> > > > never get called.
> > > > 
> > > > The patch also fixes a couple of spelling errors.
> > > 
> > > Hm, these changes are not needed in the current mainline, so there's a patch
> > > in -next that removes the code added by this patch.
> > > 
> > > It might be better to find that patch and drop it instead, IMO.
> > 
> > I agree, I think we would have seen more bugs if mainline can't suspend
> > with a USB device attached, right?
> > 
> > confused,
> 
> Okay, I was confused too.  Looking more closely, it's apparent that 
> mainline is okay and the problem was introduced by Hannes Reinecke's 
> 
> driver-core-remove-suspend-resume-callbacks-for-device-type.patch
> 
> which states that the suspend/resume callbacks in struct device_type
> are unused.  It may be true that the legacy suspend/resume methods are
> unused, but the new pm_ops methods definitely are used.
> 
> Therefore part or all of Hannes patch should be reverted.  And the 
> mainline is okay as it stands.

Ah, ick.

Hannes, care to respin this patch based on this information?

thanks,

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