| Submitter | Russell King - ARM Linux |
|---|---|
| Date | Feb. 15, 2012, 11:48 a.m. |
| Message ID | <20120215114834.GG13673@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> |
| Download | mbox | patch |
| Permalink | /patch/141313/ |
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Comments
On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 11:48 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > From: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> > > While debugging on SA11x0, the following message was observed: > > "Flash device refused suspend due to active operation (state 20)" > > Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> Pushed to l2-mtd.git, thanks!
Patch
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c index e1e122f..709a11f 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c @@ -2483,7 +2483,7 @@ static int cfi_intelext_suspend(struct mtd_info *mtd) allowed to. Or should we return -EAGAIN, because the upper layers ought to have already shut down anything which was using the device anyway? The latter for now. */ - printk(KERN_NOTICE "Flash device refused suspend due to active operation (state %d)\n", chip->oldstate); + printk(KERN_NOTICE "Flash device refused suspend due to active operation (state %d)\n", chip->state); ret = -EAGAIN; case FL_PM_SUSPENDED: break;