From: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@googlemail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
Subject: Re: [RESEND AGAIN][PATCH] pcmcia: move unbind/rebind into dev_pm_ops.complete
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 00:54:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201207100054.54535.chunkeey@googlemail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120709145939.80537e0e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Monday, July 09, 2012 11:59:39 PM Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:30:16 -0700
> Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 11:23:52PM +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> > > The idea of moving rebind procedure into pm.complete
> > > was taken from the usb-subsystem, which has similar
> > > problems with reattaching devices during/after
> > > resume.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@googlemail.com>
> > > ---
> > > To Greg:
> > >
> > > I have submitted this patch back in March and again in May.
> > > As far as I can tell it was neither rejected nor was it
> > > accepted into linux-pcmcia.git since. So I'm asking you,
> > > if you could take the patch instead... please.
> >
> > There is a PCMCIA "team" who should be taking these types of patches.
> > Why are they not doing so?
> >
>
> Things are pretty quiet in pcmcia world, but Dominik does appear to
> still be doing stuff.
>
> I sometimes queue PCMCIA patches for people, but not this one. The
> changelog is just junk. What does the patch do? Why does it do it?
> What problems does it solve? What are these mysterious "problems with
> reattaching devices" to which it refers? Useless...
>
Well, that can be improved, but it is a bit tricky.
AFAICT the usb subsystem dealt with pm in this commit:
"commit 5096aedcd2eb70fbea83f09281f97f9ec973d9de
Author: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date: Tue Aug 12 14:34:14 2008 -0400
USB: Don't rebind before "complete" callback
[...] We are not allowed to call drivers' probe routines during
a system sleep transition between the "prepare" and "complete"
callbacks, but that's exactly what we do when a driver doesn't
have full suspend/resume support. [...]"
And on the pcmcia subsystem we have this:
"commit 88b060d6c03fcb9e4d2018b4349954c4242a5c7f
Author: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
Date: Sat Jan 2 14:14:23 2010 +0100
pcmcia: improve check for same card in slot after resume
During a suspend/resume cycle, an user may change the card in the
PCMCIA/CardBus slot. [...]
For CardBus devices, the PCI hotplug interface doesn't offer a "rescan"
facility which also _removes_ devices no longer to be found behind a
bridge. Therefore, remove and re-add all devices unconditionally."
Unfortunately, the "re-add" is currently done in the *pm resume* callback
(socket_late_resume), but according to "USB: Don't rebind..." is not
allowed to have it there, so the patch moves it into the *pm complete*
callback. The Documentation/power/* contains mostly informations for
drivers developers, but AFAICT it doesn't say much about the subsystem
to which the device is connected should behave, so there's a bit of a
"citing-gap".
So, my question now: Would you accept the pcmcia patch if I add the
"USB: Don't rebind..." as a reference to why the re-add needs to be
done in complete? Or do you think that I should bug the pm people
(and Alan - since he wrote that it is "not allowed") in this case
so I can link their official answer to this patch?
Regards,
Chr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-09 22:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-06 21:23 [RESEND AGAIN][PATCH] pcmcia: move unbind/rebind into dev_pm_ops.complete Christian Lamparter
2012-07-06 21:30 ` Greg KH
2012-07-09 21:59 ` Andrew Morton
2012-07-09 22:54 ` Christian Lamparter [this message]
2012-07-09 23:01 ` Andrew Morton
2012-07-09 23:07 ` Christian Lamparter
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-07-09 23:19 Christian Lamparter
2012-07-10 14:20 ` Alan Stern
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201207100054.54535.chunkeey@googlemail.com \
--to=chunkeey@googlemail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.