Re: [PATCH 2/5] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism

From: Ming Lei
Date: Thu Oct 13 2011 - 11:21:26 EST


Hi,

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Maybe we should understand the correct model of the ordering constraints
>> for the multiple device dependancies first, could you give a description or
>> some examples about it?
>
> The requirement is that devices must be capable of resuming in the
> order given by dpm_list, and they must be capable of suspending in
> the reverse order.
>
> Therefore if device A can't work unless device B is functional, then B
> must come before A in dpm_list.

If all devices can support async suspend and resume correctly, looks like
the device order given by dpm_list is not needed any longer, doesn't it?


thanks,
--
Ming Lei
--
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/