On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Thursday, September 20, 2012, Kevin Hilman wrote:
From: Kevin Hilman khil...@ti.com
When runtime PM is disabled, what we want is for callbacks not to be
called from then on. However, currently, when runtime PM is disabled,
operations
On Friday, September 21, 2012, Alan Stern wrote:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Thursday, September 20, 2012, Kevin Hilman wrote:
From: Kevin Hilman khil...@ti.com
When runtime PM is disabled, what we want is for callbacks not to be
called from then on.
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Kevin makes a good case that pm_runtime_resume() and related functions
should succeed even when runtime PM is disabled, if the device is
already in the desired state.
The same may be true for pm_runtime_suspend(). What do you think?
Alan Stern st...@rowland.harvard.edu writes:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Kevin makes a good case that pm_runtime_resume() and related functions
should succeed even when runtime PM is disabled, if the device is
already in the desired state.
The same may be true for
On Thursday, September 20, 2012, Kevin Hilman wrote:
From: Kevin Hilman khil...@ti.com
When runtime PM is disabled, what we want is for callbacks not to be
called from then on. However, currently, when runtime PM is disabled,
operations such as 'get' will also fail even if the device is
