Re: [PATCH] Correct autosuspend_delay for non-hubs.

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007, Sarah Sharp wrote:

> > Amusingly, my patch as995 (submitted just a few minutes earlier) 
> > already includes this change.
> 
> Yes, I was amused that they came in so close together. :)  Although I
> think that setting autosuspend_disabled is a better solution.  Is there
> any reason that autosuspend_delay should be set to -1?  The topic was
> brought up before, but I never saw a response from Oliver.

The two settings are redundant; they accomplish the same thing -- to 
prevent USB autosuspend.  (However the original patch should have set 
autosuspend_delay to -HZ instead of -1; that was a thinko on my part.)

Whether it should be done one way or the other...  I don't believe it
matters very much.  If you want, you can think of autosuspend_disabled
as requiring a higher permission level (although at the moment the
sysfs files have the same permissions).  The one is a high-level 
overall setting (whether or not to autosuspend at all) and the other is 
merely a lower-level adjustment (how long the delay should be).  
Setting the delay to -1 (or -HZ) is effectively the same as setting it 
to a very, very big number -- either way there's no autosuspend.

Alan Stern


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel