On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 10:17:21AM +0000, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Tue 2008-01-08 11:57:03, Russell King wrote: > > + if (!tries) > > + printk(KERN_ERR "%s%s%s%d: Unable to drain > > transmitter\n", > > + port->dev ? port->dev->bus_id : "", > > + port->dev ? ": " : "", > > + drv->dev_name, port->line); > > > > ops->shutdown(port); > > } > > > > Is printk() enough for 'we've just lost your data' condition? Maybe we > should abort suspend if we can't drain fifo?
That would mean that a port set for hardware flow control, with hardware implemented flow control, has CTS deasserted, you'll never suspend. If you're suspending because your battery is almost dead what would you prefer - the system being prevented from suspending and losing complete power unexpectedly, resulting in complete data loss, or losing the characters in the serial port and suspending? Which is the lesser of two evils? -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
