Feature removal: ACPI S4bios support, ioctl32_conversion

Feature removal: ACPI S4bios support, ioctl32_conversion

[Blaisorblade]

Looking at Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt, I've seen an out-dated 
feature still to remove for you, so I thought to drop you a reminder email.

Thanks for attention
-- 
Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!".
Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894)
http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade

		
___________________________________ 
Yahoo! Messenger: chiamate gratuite in tutto il mondo 
http://it.beta.messenger.yahoo.com

[patch] Feature removal: ACPI S4bios support

[Pavel Machek]

Remove S4BIOS support. It is pretty useless, and only ever worked for
_me_ once. (I do not think anyone else ever tried it). It was in
feature-removal for a long time, and it should have been removed before.

Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>

---
commit a0c40c246460a82c6dcb4444d2da943484ffa6ed
tree 2378a5cdbc523736813d0ca358c820e0f61dbffc
parent 20bdabca2d11cc03d24fbb2b6e5b89ced19ccb09
author <pavel@amd.(none)> Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:24:07 +0200
committer <pavel@amd.(none)> Fri, 12 Aug 2005 15:24:07 +0200

 arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S |    6 ------
 drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c      |    8 --------
 drivers/acpi/sleep/poweroff.c  |    4 +---
 drivers/acpi/sleep/proc.c      |    2 --
 4 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S b/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S
--- a/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S
+++ b/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S
@@ -320,12 +320,6 @@ ret_point:
 	call	restore_processor_state
 	ret
 
-ENTRY(do_suspend_lowlevel_s4bios)
-	call save_processor_state
-	call save_registers
-	call acpi_enter_sleep_state_s4bios
-	ret
-
 ALIGN
 # saved registers
 saved_gdt:	.long	0,0
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c b/drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c
--- a/drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c
@@ -23,7 +23,6 @@ u8 sleep_states[ACPI_S_STATE_COUNT];
 
 static struct pm_ops acpi_pm_ops;
 
-extern void do_suspend_lowlevel_s4bios(void);
 extern void do_suspend_lowlevel(void);
 
 static u32 acpi_suspend_states[] = {
@@ -98,8 +97,6 @@ static int acpi_pm_enter(suspend_state_t
 	case PM_SUSPEND_DISK:
 		if (acpi_pm_ops.pm_disk_mode == PM_DISK_PLATFORM)
 			status = acpi_enter_sleep_state(acpi_state);
-		else
-			do_suspend_lowlevel_s4bios();
 		break;
 	case PM_SUSPEND_MAX:
 		acpi_power_off();
@@ -206,11 +203,6 @@ static int __init acpi_sleep_init(void)
 			printk(" S%d", i);
 		}
 		if (i == ACPI_STATE_S4) {
-			if (acpi_gbl_FACS->S4bios_f) {
-				sleep_states[i] = 1;
-				printk(" S4bios");
-				acpi_pm_ops.pm_disk_mode = PM_DISK_FIRMWARE;
-			}
 			if (sleep_states[i])
 				acpi_pm_ops.pm_disk_mode = PM_DISK_PLATFORM;
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/sleep/poweroff.c b/drivers/acpi/sleep/poweroff.c
--- a/drivers/acpi/sleep/poweroff.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/sleep/poweroff.c
@@ -21,9 +21,7 @@ int acpi_sleep_prepare(u32 acpi_state)
 {
 #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP
 	/* do we have a wakeup address for S2 and S3? */
-	/* Here, we support only S4BIOS, those we set the wakeup address */
-	/* S4OS is only supported for now via swsusp.. */
-	if (acpi_state == ACPI_STATE_S3 || acpi_state == ACPI_STATE_S4) {
+	if (acpi_state == ACPI_STATE_S3) {
 		if (!acpi_wakeup_address) {
 			return -EFAULT;
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/sleep/proc.c b/drivers/acpi/sleep/proc.c
--- a/drivers/acpi/sleep/proc.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/sleep/proc.c
@@ -27,8 +27,6 @@ static int acpi_system_sleep_seq_show(st
 	for (i = 0; i <= ACPI_STATE_S5; i++) {
 		if (sleep_states[i]) {
 			seq_printf(seq,"S%d ", i);
-			if (i == ACPI_STATE_S4 && acpi_gbl_FACS->S4bios_f)
-				seq_printf(seq, "S4bios ");
 		}
 	}
 


-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: [patch] Feature removal: ACPI S4bios support

[Stefan Seyfried]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> Remove S4BIOS support. It is pretty useless, and only ever worked for
> _me_ once. (I do not think anyone else ever tried it). It was in

I tried it. It did not work. And IIRC, i once dug through the code paths
and found out, that it could not work, since at least ~2.6.5 (that's
when i looked, the code was broken long before, i assume).

> feature-removal for a long time, and it should have been removed before.
-- 
Stefan Seyfried                  \ "I didn't want to write for pay. I
QA / R&D Team Mobile Devices      \ wanted to be paid for what I write."
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nürnberg \                    -- Leonard Cohen

Re: [patch] Feature removal: ACPI S4bios support

[Adrian Bunk]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 03:24:44PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:

> Remove S4BIOS support. It is pretty useless, and only ever worked for
> _me_ once. (I do not think anyone else ever tried it). It was in
> feature-removal for a long time, and it should have been removed before.
>...

You've forgotten to remove the feature-removal-schedule.txt entry in 
your patch.  ;-)

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Re: [patch] Feature removal: ACPI S4bios support

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > Remove S4BIOS support. It is pretty useless, and only ever worked for
> > _me_ once. (I do not think anyone else ever tried it). It was in
> > feature-removal for a long time, and it should have been removed before.
> >...
> 
> You've forgotten to remove the feature-removal-schedule.txt entry in 
> your patch.  ;-)

Well, that can always be done later. There are probably other small
pieces that can be removed now. But I got neither ACK nor NAK on the
patch :-(.
								Pavel
-- 
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address

Re: [patch] Feature removal: ACPI S4bios support

[Willy Tarreau]

Hi Pavel,

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 06:26:38PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > Remove S4BIOS support. It is pretty useless, and only ever worked for
> > > _me_ once. (I do not think anyone else ever tried it). It was in
> > > feature-removal for a long time, and it should have been removed before.
> > >...
> > 
> > You've forgotten to remove the feature-removal-schedule.txt entry in 
> > your patch.  ;-)
> 
> Well, that can always be done later. There are probably other small
> pieces that can be removed now. But I got neither ACK nor NAK on the
> patch :-(.

Oh, it's a good sign. There are so many people loudly complaining when a
feature is removed (including me). That means you found nobody to disagree
with you. The fact that nobody either ACKed your patch may be because nobody
is able to tell better than you if it will break anything. Maybe it's time
to repost and ask for an ACK ?

> 								Pavel

Willy

> -- 
> if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/