From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: State of resume for AHCI? Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 13:19:14 -0700 Message-ID: <447F4BC2.8060808@goop.org> References: <447F23C2.8030802@goop.org> <447F3250.5070101@rtr.ca> <20060601183904.GR4400@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:29377 "EHLO mail.goop.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965295AbWFAUTS (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:19:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20060601183904.GR4400@suse.de> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Jens Axboe Cc: Mark Lord , Jeff Garzik , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Hannes Reinecke , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Jens Axboe wrote: > It's a lot more complicated than that, I'm afraid. ahci doesn't even > have the resume/suspend methods defined, plus it needs more work than > piix on resume. > Hannes Reinecke's patch implements those functions, basically by factoring out the shutdown and init code and calling them at suspend/resume time as well. Is that correct/sufficient? Or should something else be happening? J