From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Subject: Re: [patch/rft 2.6.17-rc2] swsusp resume must not device_suspend() Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:44:21 -0700 Message-ID: <200604271244.22376.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <200604241429.52022.david-b@pacbell.net> <200604261431.44137.david-b@pacbell.net> <200604270024.15651.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============11352918926319422==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200604270024.15651.rjw@sisk.pl> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Nigel Cunningham , Andrew Morton , linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org --===============11352918926319422== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline > > > > But it's not the root cause of the problem either. The same problem appears if > > > > the device holding the resume partition gets forced into this "broken suspend" > > > > state. > > > > > > Well, IMO the state may or may not be broken depending on the device, > > > so we should not assume it will always be broken. > > > > Not so. See my previous emails. The "broken suspend" state is broken > > by definition. Maybe you're referring to a different issue ... whether > > or not its driver would notice that bug. > > It is a bug from your point of view, and I was referring to the fact that it > apparently doesn't matter for many drivers. That is, to "whether driver notices". It's clearly a bug with respect to how the FREEZE state is defined. Not all drivers need to notice all bugs. - Dave --===============11352918926319422== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline --===============11352918926319422==--