Re: [PATCH] PM: Fix potential issue with failing asynchronous suspend (was: Re: [PATCH] PM: Prevent waiting ...)

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, September 16, 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx>
> > Subject: PM: Fix potential issue with failing asynchronous suspend
> > 
> > There is a potential issue with the asynchronous suspend code that
> > a device driver suspending asynchronously may not notice that it
> > should back off.  There are two failing scenarions, (1) when the
> > driver is waiting for a driver suspending synchronously to complete
> > and that second driver returns error code, in which case async_error
> > won't be set and the waiting driver will continue suspending and (2)
> > after the driver has called device_pm_wait_for_dev() and the waited
> > for driver returns error code, in which case the caller of
> > device_pm_wait_for_dev() will not know that there was an error and
> > will continue suspending.
> > 
> > To fix this issue make __device_suspend() set async_error, so
> > async_suspend() doesn't need to set it any more, and make
> > device_pm_wait_for_dev() return async_error, so that its callers
> > can check whether or not they should continue suspending.
> > 
> > No more changes are necessary, since device_pm_wait_for_dev() is
> > not used by any drivers' suspend routines at the moment.
> 
> You just squeaked by, since it is _is_ being used by a USB _resume_
> routine.  :-)

I know that, but resume actually doesn't need to care about async_error.

Thanks,
Rafael
--
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/