From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oliver Neukum Subject: [mm-patch]Documentation:reference notifiers.txt in freezing-of-tasks.txt Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 10:26:19 +0200 Message-ID: <200707091026.20463.oliver@neukum.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, Andrew Morton , rjw@sisk.pl List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Hi, freezing-of-tasks.txt mentions firmware issues without mentioning the use of the new notifier API to overcome them. Here's an update. Regards Oliver Signed-off-by: Oliver Neukum ---- --- a/Documentation/power/freezing-of-tasks.txt 2007-07-09 10:06:51.000000000 +0200 +++ b/Documentation/power/freezing-of-tasks.txt 2007-07-09 10:24:05.000000000 +0200 @@ -155,6 +155,8 @@ Suppose, however, that the firmware file only through another device that hasn't been resumed yet. In that case, request_firmware() will fail regardless of whether or not the freezing of tasks is used. Consequently, the problem is not really related to the freezing of -tasks, since it generally exists anyway. [The solution to this particular -problem is to keep the firmware in memory after it's loaded for the first time -and upload if from memory to the device whenever necessary.] +tasks, since it generally exists anyway. + +A driver must have all firmwares it may need in RAM before suspend() is called. +If keeping them is not practical, for example due to their size, they must be +requested early enough using the suspend notifier API described in notifiers.txt.