Re: question on flushing buffers and spinning down disk

Oliver Neukum <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.usb.devel,gmane.linux.scsi
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Am Montag 24 September 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> 
> > > suspend.  The PM and driver cores don't include _any_ provision for
> > > runtime suspend; it has to be managed separately by each subsystem.
> > 
> > There we have a problem. We'd have to solve it for each subsystem transition.
> > Storage has this type of children, other devices will have to care for other
> > types of child devices. If we have a device tree, we should use it.
> 
> It sounds like you want to add the equivalent of
> usb_autopm_get/set_device() and usb_autopm_get/set_interface() into the

That would be an ideal solution, but it is not necessary to solve this
problem.

> driver model.  But it would not be appropriate, since other subsystems
> don't have the same kinds of runtime power levels as USB does.

But we don't bother when suspending the whole system. So why not simply
walk the subtrees under a USB device? Let the subsystem choose what
depth of sleep to use.
 
> There may be no way of getting around the need for specialized 
> communication methods between subsystems for runtime PM.

That's a lot of code duplication and should be a solution of last resort.

	Regards
		Oliver

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.