Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and hibernationcallbacks (rev. 6)

[Alan Stern]

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.

> > 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.

Alan Stern

--
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/