From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: Null suspend/resume functions Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:41:12 +0000 Message-ID: <20091118134112.GF6592@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <20091117125901.GF823@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <200911172314.04396.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 492A2243F3 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:41:14 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200911172314.04396.rjw@sisk.pl> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Magnus Damm , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Magnus Damm , Kuninori Morimoto , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:14:04PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > In fact, it's not mandatory for bus types, not for drivers. IMO bus types > really have to know how to suspend a device and how to resume it, > otherwise the core framework won't be useful anyway. What the bus type does > about drivers not implementing ->runtime_suspend() or ->runtime_resume(), it's > up to the bus type. That's even documented IIRC. OK, thanks - I hadn't realised that these were being called directly from the bus type code rather than by the core. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757039AbZKRNlJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:41:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756693AbZKRNlI (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:41:08 -0500 Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:36860 "EHLO opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753691AbZKRNlI (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 08:41:08 -0500 Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:41:12 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Magnus Damm , Kuninori Morimoto , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, Magnus Damm , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Null suspend/resume functions Message-ID: <20091118134112.GF6592@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <20091117125901.GF823@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <200911172314.04396.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200911172314.04396.rjw@sisk.pl> X-Cookie: May explode if improperly recharged. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:14:04PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > In fact, it's not mandatory for bus types, not for drivers. IMO bus types > really have to know how to suspend a device and how to resume it, > otherwise the core framework won't be useful anyway. What the bus type does > about drivers not implementing ->runtime_suspend() or ->runtime_resume(), it's > up to the bus type. That's even documented IIRC. OK, thanks - I hadn't realised that these were being called directly from the bus type code rather than by the core.