On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 15:37, David Brownell wrote: > Pavel Machek wrote: > > >>All of which is a roundabout way of adding to what I > >>said: the PM infrastructure USB will need to rely on > >>seems like it needs polishing yet! :) > > > > > > Do you need vetoing? Otherwise it should be ready, except for APM. > > USB drivers don't talk suspend/resume yet, so they > won't notice missing features there. Regressions > are a different story though. > > But I can imagine that usb-storage (or is that SCSI?) > might want to veto suspending devices that are being > used for some kinds of i/o. Eventually it should exist.
The only place where a kernel driver may veto is when doing things like firmware flashing. If you want to veto suspend when burning a CD, it's userland policy. We still need, I beleive, to define/write a proper userland-side API for all these with the daemon that goes with it. That will be next step once we have the kernel side working properly ;) Ben. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
