From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Subject: Re: [RFC 1/5] devcore introduce wakeup_event callback Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 08:52:59 -0700 Message-ID: <200809090852.59461.david-b@pacbell.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from smtp124.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.97]:31170 "HELO smtp124.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753151AbYIIQ0N (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 12:26:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: "Li, Shaohua" , "linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" On Tuesday 09 September 2008, Alan Stern wrote: > What about case (c): The device uses legacy PM but the wakeup setting= s=20 > have already been handled by the ACPI AML code? =A0There's no need to= =20 > clear any extra wakeup-related stuff, but it still is necessary to te= ll=20 > the driver about the event. Good question ... best if Intel answers it. :0 > (As a matter of fact, I have no idea whether or not Intel's legacy PM= =20 > for UHCI is implemented in AML. =A0It may vary from one BIOS to anoth= er.) One data point: on the laptop used to type this message, the GPE code block includes stuff like this for each UHCI: Method (_L0C, 0, NotSerialized) { Notify (\_SB.PCI0.USB3, 0x02) } Without diving into the ICHx specs (which I believe DO have such details, thanks be!), my first reaction is that this is not a "case (c)". Of course, the rest of the AML code is, as usual, cryptic (I'd rather have C code), and such stuff might be hidden elsewhere in the event sequence. - Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html