From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: ACPI suspend: test 64-bit waking vector (was Re: [PATCH] ACPI suspend: Always use the 32-bit waking vector) Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 07:45:18 +0200 Message-ID: <200809170745.19645.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <1220507476.4007.117.camel@yakui_zhao.sh.intel.com> <200809061313.02088.rjw@sisk.pl> <20080915111836.GA17913@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080915111836.GA17913@elf.ucw.cz> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: suspend-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: suspend-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Pavel Machek Cc: "Zhao, Yakui" , Suspend-devel list , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "andi@firstfloor.org" , "Li, Shaohua" , "Zhang, Rui" , "lenb@kernel.org" List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Monday, 15 of September 2008, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > ACPI specificiation tells us that x_firmware_waking_vector is > preffered, and maybe it works better than firmware_waking_vector on > some machines. > > Unfortunately, it does not seem to work on thinkpad x60... but I am > not sure if I'm not doing something wrong. > > Testing/ideas would be welcome. Well, the spec says that if x_firmware_waking_vector is non-zero, the BIOS is supposed to call your wake-up code in Protected Mode ... Thanks, Rafael ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/