On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 08:55 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 2:17 AM, Oliver Neukum <oneu...@suse.de> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 16:10 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> From: Lan Tianyu <tianyu....@intel.com>
> >> +* wakeup note: the implementation does not allow a port connected to a
> >> + device with wakeup capability to be powered off.
> >
> > The capability may be there. It just mustn't be enabled.
>
> I'm not sure I grok this comment? Specifically I am referring to this logic:
>
> usb_port_suspend() {
> [..]
> if (status == 0 && !udev->do_remote_wakeup && udev->persist_enabled) {
do_remote_wakeup does not mean that the device can do remote wakeup.
It means that some interface driver has requested remote wakeup to be
enabled at the next suspend. Some drivers don't use remote wakeup
under some circumstances even though the device does support it.
The best example for this is btusb.
If you do "hciconfig down" remote wakeup will not be requested.
Your description suggests that it depends on the device's capabilities.
Regards
Oliver
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
