From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oliver Neukum Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: Add support for runtime power management of the hcd Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:41:11 +0100 Message-ID: <200911120841.11263.oliver@neukum.org> References: <200911112324.58076.rjw@sisk.pl> <20091112003312.GA27572@srcf.ucam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp-out002.kontent.com ([81.88.40.216]:44987 "EHLO smtp-out002.kontent.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750976AbZKLHii (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:38:38 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20091112003312.GA27572@srcf.ucam.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Alan Stern , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, USB list Am Donnerstag, 12. November 2009 01:33:12 schrieb Matthew Garrett: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:09:24PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > > That's okay. There's no harm in trying to enable remote wakeup on a > > device which doesn't support it. > > There's harm if we're using the ability to generate remote waleups as a > condition for whether we can perform runtime pm on the device... That I would consider backwards. If the user enables runtime power management of a device, he has to live with remote wakeup being enabled. At most the kernel might resume and switch off remote wakeup on the device, but we might also leave this to user space. Regards Oliver