From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] swsusp: do not use pm_ops (was: Re: ...) Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 00:16:08 +0200 Message-ID: <200705080016.09735.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <200705072300.03299.rjw@sisk.pl> <200705071445.40547.david-b@pacbell.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200705071445.40547.david-b@pacbell.net> 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: David Brownell Cc: Nigel Cunningham , Pekka Enberg , Pavel Machek , Johannes Berg , Linux-pm mailing list List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Monday, 7 May 2007 23:45, David Brownell wrote: > On Monday 07 May 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Monday, 7 May 2007 03:16, David Brownell wrote: > > > > So for now I have drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c exporting > > > > > > s_state = acpi_get_target_sleep_state(); > > > > > > so that ACPI-aware code can know to call "_S3D" instead of > > > the "_S1D" or "_S4D" methods (and "_S3W" etc). Of course > > > the $SUBJECT patch will finish borking that for S4. :( > > > > Why exactly? > > Because it adds new code paths ... currently pm_ops methods > record the target state. Fixable later. Hmm, I think hibernation_ops do the equivalent of what pm_ops did for ACPI_STATE_S4 and the target state is still recorded (in acpi_enter_sleep_state_prep()). Isn't that correct?