runtime_pm_fixups.patch

[Kyle McMartin]

Am I just being an idiot? It looks to me like this patch was bugged? (I
only noticed because the acpi_power_get_inferred_state prototype was changed
to return the state in a pointer.)

We've been using it in pci_bind.c like this,

	acpi_power_transition(device, acpi_power_get_inferred_state(device));

But it seems acpi_power_get_inferred_state only returns exit status, and
not the ACPI_STATE_D0...ACPI_STATE_D3 values which acpi_power_transition
expects. This may have been accidentally working since the common return
value from acpi_power_get_inferred_state is 0.

I changed pci_bind as such to,

        acpi_power_get_inferred_state(device, &state);
        acpi_power_transition(device, state);

And am testing now...

Change to acpi_power_get_inferred_state was in,

commit 32a00d274e877eab3ea7ab196b75c9be5170d25e
Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw at sisk.pl>
Date:   Thu Nov 25 00:05:17 2010 +0100

    ACPI / PM: Prevent acpi_power_get_inferred_state() from making
    changes
    
    acpi_power_get_inferred_state() should not update
    device->power.state behind the back of its caller, so make it return
    the state via a pointer instead.
    
    Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw at sisk.pl>
    Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown at intel.com>


--Kyle