Re: pci_set_power_state() failure and breaking suspend

[Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>]

Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, 24 October 2006 08:54, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > However, this raises the question of do we actually want to prevent
> > machines to suspend when they have a PCI device that don't have the PCI
> > PM capability ? I'm asking that because I can easily imagine that sort
> > of construct growing into more drivers (sounds logical if you don't
> > think) and I can even imagine somebody thinking it's a good idea to slap
> > a __must_check on pci_set_power_state() ... 
>
>
> As far as the suspend to RAM is concerned, I don't know.
>
> For the suspend to disk we can ignore the error if we know that the device
> in question won't do anything like a DMA transfer into memory while we're
> creating the suspend image.

I think it should be ignored for suspend-to-RAM as well; even if a 
device or two is consuming unnecessary power, it's better than not being 
able to suspend at all, causing more things to consume unnecessary power.

At most, a warning should be issued so the user knows what's going on, 
and can choose whether to suspend to disk instead (or choose to complain 
to the device manufacturer).

-Scott
-
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/