Re: [PATCH 1/9] PM: Add suspend block api.

[Arve Hjønnevåg]

2010/4/23 Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
>
>> 2010/4/23 Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> > On Thu, 22 Apr 2010, [UTF-8] Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
>> ...
>> >> +Calling suspend_block when the suspend blocker is active or suspend_unblock when
>> >> +it is not active has no effect. This allows drivers to update their state and
>> >> +call suspend suspend_block or suspend_unblock based on the result.
>> >
>> > But suspend_block() and suspend_unblock() don't nest.  You should
>> > mention this.
>> >
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean by this? I think the first sentence
>> dictates nesting is not supported.
>
> That fact is implicit from the first sentence.  Mentioning it
> _explicitly_ will help people to understand more easily.  You don't
> have to add much; a parenthetical remark would be enough:
>
>        Calling suspend_block when the suspend blocker is active or
>        suspend_unblock when it is not active has no effect (i.e.,
>        these functions don't nest).  This allows drivers to ...
>

OK.

-- 
Arve Hjønnevåg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/