From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263610AbTH1Isl (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Aug 2003 04:48:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263856AbTH1IsP (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Aug 2003 04:48:15 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.86.99.235]:48772 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263610AbTH1IkY (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Aug 2003 04:40:24 -0400 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Patrick Mochel Cc: Russell King , Greg KH , linux-kernel mailing list In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <1062059940.1293.120.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:39:00 +0200 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: benh@kernel.crashing.org Subject: Re: PCI PM & compatibility Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Version: 3.0+cvs (built Mon Aug 18 15:53:30 BST 2003) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes X-Pentafluge-Mail-From: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 01:29, Patrick Mochel wrote: > I don't understand. We suspend the children before we suspend the device, > so as long as all the children go done, so will the parent device. Forget it... It had crap in mind. Anyway, my point was actually the opposite than what I wrote :( I was really to make sure that if a device is "held" up by pm_users beeing non-NULL, it's _parents_ (and not it's children, sorry about the confusion), are also held non-suspended... I think I'll sleep a bit and then just go look at the code ;) Ben.