From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] PM: Introduce pm_power_off_prepare Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 21:52:31 +0200 Message-ID: <20070704195231.GI2728@elf.ucw.cz> References: <200707012051.48338.rjw@sisk.pl> <200707012054.31782.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:56407 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757093AbXGDTwf (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2007 15:52:35 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200707012054.31782.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: pm list , ACPI Devel Maling List On Sun 2007-07-01 20:54:31, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Introduce the pm_power_off_prepare() callback that can be registered by the > interested platforms in analogy with pm_idle() and pm_power_off(), used for > preparing the system to power off (needed by ACPI). > > This allows us to drop acpi_sysclass and device_acpi that are only defined in > order to register the ACPI power off preparation callback, which is needed by > pm_power_off() registered in a much different way. Well, the acpi way works with more than one piece of code "listening" for powerdowns... and does not seem that ugly to me. Okay, so accessing system_state is not _that_ nice... aha, and perhaps I understand why 1/2 of this series is right... it called prepare for S4 even when we had shutdown in /sys/power/disk, right? Hmm. Okay, I think I can ACK both of these patches, but ACPI people should have chance to comment, and it probably needs to stay in -mm for a while. -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html