Am Dienstag, den 24.10.2017, 12:16 +0800 schrieb Daniel Drake:
> Hi Oliver,
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Oliver Neukum <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, den 18.10.2017, 15:15 +0800 schrieb Daniel Drake:
> > >
> > > Notes:
> > > v2:
> > > - Handle quirk later in suspend, to avoid interfering with other parts
> > > of the suspend routine.
> > > - Don't do the disconnect on runtime suspend, only for S3 suspend
> >
> > well, can we effectively runtime suspend these devices?
>
> How can I test for effective runtime suspend?
No, I meant, does it make sense to do that?
> > Furthermore, it seems to me that we indeed cannot do a runtime
> > suspend on external devices needing this quirk, but what about
> > internal devices?
>
> In this case the modem is an internal device.
It seems to me that obviously if you disable a device's port you
cannot support remote wakeup. But I do not see why, if the device
is internal you would want to block runtime suspend, even if
remote wakeup is not necessary.
Regards
Oliver
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
