From: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.de>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>, Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@mail.ru>,
pingc@wacom.com, "linux-pm" <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] wacom + runtime PM = AA deadlock
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:03:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201009141603.59338.oneukum@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1009140954180.1648-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Am Dienstag, 14. September 2010, 16:01:14 schrieb Alan Stern:
> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>
> > Am Montag, 13. September 2010, 22:02:16 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > > > > Is there any point in resuming the device during close() just in order
> > > > > to kill the interrupt URB? It seems counterproductive -- if the device
> > > > > had been suspended then there wouldn't be any interrupt URB to kill in
> > > > > the first place.
> > > >
> > > > Suppose the device does not support remote wakeup. It would never
> > > > be autosuspended while it is open, but simply resetting the flag
> > > > would never reach the PM layer.
> > >
> > > Whoops, that's right. I didn't see the assignment to
> > > needs_remote_wakeup.
> >
> > Should I have used usb_autopm_get_interface_no_resume()?
>
> That actually would work. It's a good idea. The only drawback (not a
> big one) is that if the device _was_ suspended with remote wakeup
> enabled, doing this wouldn't turn off remote wakeup. I think that
> doesn't matter.
I am afraid it does matter as devices whose remote wakeup is enabled
may draw more power.
Regards
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-14 14:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-13 12:24 wacom + runtime PM = AA deadlock Jiri Slaby
2010-09-13 14:25 ` [linux-pm] " Alan Stern
2010-09-13 14:56 ` Oliver Neukum
2010-09-13 15:17 ` [linux-pm] " Alan Stern
2010-09-13 19:05 ` Oliver Neukum
2010-09-13 20:02 ` Alan Stern
2010-09-13 20:28 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-09-14 8:13 ` Oliver Neukum
2010-09-14 14:01 ` Alan Stern
2010-09-14 14:03 ` Oliver Neukum [this message]
2010-09-14 15:23 ` Alan Stern
2010-09-14 15:30 ` Oliver Neukum
2010-09-14 16:05 ` Alan Stern
2010-09-13 17:10 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-09-13 19:20 ` [linux-pm] " Oliver Neukum
2010-09-14 0:52 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-09-14 6:07 ` Oliver Neukum
2010-10-04 16:13 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-10-04 18:33 ` Oliver Neukum
2010-10-04 18:38 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-10-04 19:24 ` Oliver Neukum
2010-10-05 5:41 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-10-05 5:54 ` Oliver Neukum
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=201009141603.59338.oneukum@suse.de \
--to=oneukum@suse.de \
--cc=dtor@mail.ru \
--cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=pingc@wacom.com \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox