From: Alexey Starikovskiy <aystarik@gmail.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Carlos Corbacho <carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
pm list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Suspend code ordering (again)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 18:24:06 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47727216.4050003@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200712261607.18429.rjw@sisk.pl>
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, 26 of December 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 25 Dec 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>>> the ACPI specification between versions 1.0x and 2.0. Namely, while ACPI
>>> 2.0 and later wants us to put devices into low power states before calling
>>> _PTS, ACPI 1.0x wants us to do that after calling _PTS. Since we're following
>>> the 2.0 and later specifications right now, we're not doing the right thing for
>>> the (strictly) ACPI 1.0x-compliant systems.
>>>
>>> We ought to be able to fix things on the high level, by calling _PTS earlier on
>>> systems that claim to be ACPI 1.0x-compliant. That will require us to modify
>>> the generic susped code quite a bit and will need to be tested for some time.
>>>
>> That's insane. Are you really saying that ACPI wants totally different
>> orderings for different versions of the spec?
>>
>
> Yes, I am.
>
>
>> And does Windows really do that?
>>
>
> I don't know.
>
Windows was compliant only with 1.x spec until Vista.
With Vista claims are 3.x compliance.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-26 15:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200712231419.40207.carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk>
2007-12-23 16:30 ` x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-23 17:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-23 18:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-23 22:20 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-23 23:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-12-24 0:09 ` Carlos Corbacho
2007-12-24 0:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-24 1:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-24 3:05 ` Carlos Corbacho
2007-12-24 13:44 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-24 13:44 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-24 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-24 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-24 21:53 ` Carlos Corbacho
2007-12-24 21:53 ` Carlos Corbacho
2007-12-25 16:13 ` Suspend code ordering (again) (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM) Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-25 16:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-26 4:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-26 4:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-26 15:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-26 15:24 ` Alexey Starikovskiy [this message]
2007-12-26 17:50 ` Suspend code ordering (again) H. Peter Anvin
2007-12-26 17:50 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-12-26 15:24 ` Alexey Starikovskiy
2007-12-26 15:07 ` Suspend code ordering (again) (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM) Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-25 12:12 ` x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM Pavel Machek
2007-12-25 12:28 ` Carlos Corbacho
2007-12-23 17:53 ` [Bug 9528] " Linus Torvalds
2007-12-23 17:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-23 19:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-23 19:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-23 20:43 ` Yinghai Lu
[not found] <fa.Tr7qmPdet0rF2FSRX/94s2UEMSE@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.WvaVh83zJOh/eZUrjQOZy4J8JFk@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.VsyhBr+FAHB0bTb9poSZS80xN/0@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.XycBwhGuyvtVl/QW5HONqLwOags@ifi.uio.no>
2007-12-27 18:07 ` Suspend code ordering (again) Robert Hancock
2007-12-27 20:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-27 20:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-12-28 0:25 ` Robert Hancock
2007-12-28 5:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-28 5:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-08 3:03 ` Shaohua Li
2008-01-08 3:03 ` Shaohua Li
2007-12-28 0:25 ` Robert Hancock
2007-12-27 18:07 ` Robert Hancock
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47727216.4050003@gmail.com \
--to=aystarik@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=hpa@kernel.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.