Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755446AbYFJO72 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:59:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754019AbYFJO7U (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:59:20 -0400 Received: from iolanthe.rowland.org ([192.131.102.54]:46445 "HELO iolanthe.rowland.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753745AbYFJO7T (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:59:19 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:59:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Alan Stern X-X-Sender: stern@iolanthe.rowland.org To: Oliver Neukum cc: Pavel Machek , , Linus Torvalds , Greg KH , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , kernel list , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc6: CONFIG_USB_PERSIST forced on In-Reply-To: <200806101055.14539.oliver@neukum.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1674 Lines: 44 On Tue, 10 Jun 2008, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Montag 09 Juni 2008 23:56:51 schrieb Pavel Machek: > > On Mon 2008-06-09 14:39:10, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > > > > I believe we should just revert the "CONFIG_USB_PERSIST force on" > > > > patch, and solve this properly in 2.6.27. > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > The code would _still_ be buggy with that revert in place. You have to > > > enable CONFIG_USB_PERSIST just to get even the _possibility_ of the sane > > > behavior. > > > > > > If there is a problem with usblp, it just needs to be fixed. > > > > With USB_PERSIST on, you have problem on all drivers but usb-storage, > > AFAICT... because usb-storage seems to be the only driver implementing > > reset_resume. > > > > I guess it is possible to do something like "if reset_resume() is > > unavailable, try plain resume()" in usb/driver.c, but I'd really > > changes to the suspend/resume callback to go in -rc1 so that they are > > tested properly, and not hot-patch it now. > > If a hotfix it must be, here's my take. It works for me, but it isn't > tested well. > Alan, what do you think? I don't have time right now to check it; will do so later today. At first glance it seems okay -- it doesn't cover absolutely all the cases, but it does cover system sleep transitions. And it's clearly better than what Linus proposed. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/