From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: rumjantsev@papillon.ru (237 Rumjantsev Egor (PROG))
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 15:50:19 +0600
Subject: vpack270 and sleep mode
In-Reply-To: <20100526092756.GA6232@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1272311167-576-1-git-send-email-marek.vasut@gmail.com>
	<4BFBD01E.8010101@papillon.ru>
	<20100525202447.GD16204@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
	<201005252247.57688.marek.vasut@gmail.com>
	<4BFC99CB.2090902@papillon.ru>
	<20100526090748.GB25435@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
	<4BFCE794.9000306@papillon.ru>
	<20100526092756.GA6232@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Message-ID: <4BFCEEDB.4030408@papillon.ru>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

26.05.2010 15:27, Russell King - ARM Linux ?????:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 03:19:16PM +0600, 237 Rumjantsev Egor (PROG) wrote:
>> no they doesn't, but here is a part of pxa2xx-flash.c and driver
>> structure registered by driver_register call. Is it problem ?
>>
>>
>> static struct device_driver pxa2xx_flash_driver = {
>>          .name           = "pxa2xx-flash",
>>          .bus            =&platform_bus_type,
>>          .probe          = pxa2xx_flash_probe,
>>          .remove         = __exit_p(pxa2xx_flash_remove),
>>          .suspend        = pxa2xx_flash_suspend,
>>          .resume         = pxa2xx_flash_resume,
>
> The suspend and resume callbacks are removed in later kernels - could you
> try commenting these two out and seeing what the effect is please?
>
i commented suspend/resume functions and inserted return 0 but it didn't 
help

-- 
Rumjantsev Egor