Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758620AbcCVPcK (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Mar 2016 11:32:10 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:35070 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758098AbcCVPcH (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Mar 2016 11:32:07 -0400 Message-ID: <1458660552.1990.13.camel@suse.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] lan78xx: Protect runtime_auto check by #ifdef CONFIG_PM From: Oliver Neukum To: Alan Stern Cc: "David S. Miller" , Geert Uytterhoeven , Microchip Linux Driver Support , Woojung Huh , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Guenter Roeck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 16:29:12 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 392 Lines: 13 On Tue, 2016-03-22 at 11:13 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > Indeed. In that case the point is moot. But it is correct to ask > > the core whether the device is autosuspended at that point rather > > than keep a private flag if you can. > > That's why we have pm_runtime_status_suspended(). I guess we are in violent agreement though we were unaware of being in that state. Regards Oliver