On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 7:16 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> Well, the question is how many runtime resume callbacks actually allocate
> memory. If they are not too many, we can just flag all of them. Otherwise,
At least, almost all pci devices driver in some platform(acpi) and all usb
devices
On Wednesday 17 of October 2012 19:07:25 Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > This appears to be a bit too heavy handed. First of all, it seems to affect
> > all memory allocations going in parallel with the resume callback. Second,
>
> No, the fla
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> This appears to be a bit too heavy handed. First of all, it seems to affect
> all memory allocations going in parallel with the resume callback. Second,
No, the flag is per task, only memory allocation inside resume callback
is effec
On Tuesday 16 of October 2012 23:59:42 Ming Lei wrote:
> This patch applies the introduced memalloc_noio_save() and
> memalloc_noio_restore() to force memory allocation with no I/O
> during runtime_resume callback.
>
> Cc: Alan Stern
> Cc: Oliver Neukum
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Signed-off-by:
This patch applies the introduced memalloc_noio_save() and
memalloc_noio_restore() to force memory allocation with no I/O
during runtime_resume callback.
Cc: Alan Stern
Cc: Oliver Neukum
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki
Signed-off-by: Ming Lei
---
drivers/base/power/runtime.c | 14 ++
1 fi
