Re: [PATCH RESEND] PM / Runtime: let rpm_resume() succeed if RPM_ACTIVE, even when disabled

2012-09-21 Thread Kevin Hilman
Alan Stern 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 pm_runti

Re: [PATCH RESEND] PM / Runtime: let rpm_resume() succeed if RPM_ACTIVE, even when disabled

2012-09-21 Thread Alan Stern
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 th

Re: [PATCH RESEND] PM / Runtime: let rpm_resume() succeed if RPM_ACTIVE, even when disabled

2012-09-21 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
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 > > > > > > When runtime PM is disabled, what we want is for callbacks not to be > > > called from then on. Howeve

Re: [PATCH RESEND] PM / Runtime: let rpm_resume() succeed if RPM_ACTIVE, even when disabled

2012-09-21 Thread Alan Stern
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, September 20, 2012, Kevin Hilman wrote: > > From: Kevin Hilman > > > > 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

Re: [PATCH RESEND] PM / Runtime: let rpm_resume() succeed if RPM_ACTIVE, even when disabled

2012-09-20 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Thursday, September 20, 2012, Kevin Hilman wrote: > From: Kevin Hilman > > 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 > currently a