From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] More updates for 2.6.25 Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:05:39 +0100 Message-ID: <200801231605.39598.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <200801110118.46106.rjw@sisk.pl> <200801161337.19070.rjw@sisk.pl> <20080123083010.GB11223@elf.ucw.cz> 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]:35955 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751934AbYAWPIA (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:08:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20080123083010.GB11223@elf.ucw.cz> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Pavel Machek Cc: Len Brown , ACPI Devel Maling List , pm list On Wednesday, 23 of January 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Wed 2008-01-16 13:37:18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wednesday, 16 of January 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > On Tue 2008-01-15 23:22:33, Len Brown wrote: > > > > On Thursday 10 January 2008 19:18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > Len, > > > > > > > > > > Please add the following three patches to the suspend branch. > > > > > > > > Applied (and suspend branch has been re-based to latest linus tree) > > > > > > Was that "lets reorder notifications, old order was more logical, but > > > it fixes apm?" series? > > > > Yes, plus the docs update from Dave Brownell. > > Can we stop that reordering? I do not think it is such a good idea. In this particular case it's needed to unbreak the APM emulation and it certainly is not a good idea to have two different orderings of the notifiers vs the freezer (hence the second patch in the series). Thanks, Rafael