From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Subject: Re: [PATCH] implement pm_ops.valid for everybody Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:44:21 -0700 Message-ID: <200703221644.22760.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <200703221344.l2MDi2Q9007989@olwen.urbana.css.mot.com> <200703221556.08948.david-b@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Guennadi Liakhovetski Cc: alexey.y.starikovskiy@intel.com, dirk.behme@de.bosch.com, pavel@ucw.cz, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, johannes@sipsolutions.net, nico@cam.org, ben@simtec.co.uk List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 22 March 2007 4:29 pm, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, David Brownell wrote: > = > > On Thursday 22 March 2007 3:10 pm, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > = > > > Well, I think the only clear distinction between the STR and "standby= " is the > > > necessity to go through a boot-like procedure in order to resume from= the > > > former. > > = > > So what's a "boot-like procedure"? Ten instructions? A hundred? > > A thousand? Ten thousand? Does it take a certain amount of time? > > Does it perform certain operations? Does it involve going through > > ACPI (or APM)? If so, what about the fact that ACPI (or APM) are > > involved in "standby" resumes too (on platforms using them)? > = > Ok, on ARM / (at least embedded) ppc I would say - going through reset = > vector / toggling reset pin. However, I would also say that it makes plenty of sense to talk about an STR state that doesn't involve such a reset. > Do these terms still make sense on hyper-threaded-cored-celled CPUs? "Reset", sure ... though there are lots of types of reset. And "boot-like procedure" is inherently vague though. - Dave