From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754358Ab1EBX2b (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 May 2011 19:28:31 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36752 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751151Ab1EBX2a (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 May 2011 19:28:30 -0400 Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 16:28:20 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , LKML , Linux PM mailing list Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Print a warning if firmware is requested when tasks are frozen Message-ID: <20110502232820.GA9578@suse.de> References: <201105030044.51661.rjw@sisk.pl> <20110502231234.GA6430@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 04:21:09PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > > > But you can safely call this function with nowait set, and this warning > > should not be triggered, right? > > Why would you want that? > > It's _always_ wrong to ask for firmware during resume. "nowait" or not > is totally irrelevant. A driver that depends on the firmware being > built in to the kernel is a buggy driver, why would you want to > silently allow that kind of crap? It's just a timebomb waiting for > somebody to compile the kernel differently. A driver that does not rely on the firmware being built in would be correct in calling request_firmware_nowait() on resume, then when userspace is properly woken up, the firmware would be sent to the device, then the driver would be notified, load it, and handle things as part of its resume sequence from that notification. Isn't that ideally what we want to have happen? Or am I missing something else? thanks, greg k-h