From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] swsusp: Introduce restore platform operations Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 22:30:34 +0200 Message-ID: <200705222230.35078.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <200705180019.35548.rjw@sisk.pl> <200705222203.48568.rjw@sisk.pl> <46534E2C.60808@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:58056 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754431AbXEVUZ2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 16:25:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <46534E2C.60808@gmail.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Alexey Starikovskiy Cc: Pavel Machek , ACPI Devel Maling List , pm list , Johannes Berg On Tuesday, 22 May 2007 22:10, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki ?????: > > On Tuesday, 22 May 2007 01:55, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Moreover, I'm not quite certain in which points the GPEs should actually be > > > > disabled and enabled. For example, there are some testing data indicating that > > the enabling of GPEs should be done after all of the device drivers' .resume() > > callbacks have run. > Opposite, ACPI devices require enabled GPEs to do their resume, so > enabling of GPEs > should happen at least before .resume() of ACPI devices is called. Theoretically, that surely is correct, and which is what the patch actually does. :-) Still, we have users for whom hibernation was broken by moving the execution of acpi_leave_sleep_state() before enable_nonboot_cpus(). At least on one of these systems the hibernation can be fixed by removing the execution of acpi_leave_sleep_state() from before enable_nonboot_cpus() and adding a simplified version of it that only executes _WAK and enables the GPEs *after* device_resume(). Unfortunately, I was unable to check if _WAK was necessary for this (I hope it wasn't). Greetings, Rafael