From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
To: "Matthew Garrett" <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
"Uwe Kleine-König" <Uwe.Kleine-Koenig@digi.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: A minimally power-aware driver treats all messages as SUSPEND?
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 19:57:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200807011957.24354.david-b@pacbell.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080702010857.GA27031@srcf.ucam.org>
On Tuesday 01 July 2008, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 05:14:15PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>
> > With that I might have to do less on SUSPEND because some state might be
> > preserved after the machine comes up again.
>
> The only hardware state guaranteed by ACPI is the contents of RAM. It's
> valid for the platform to cut the power rails to everything else, so
> from a driver point of view it's almost always equivalent to
> hibernation.
Right. And moreover ... the way many drivers support suspend-to-RAM
in that "minimally power-aware" sense is kind of brain-dead: they
resume by resetting and re-initializing everything!! Which trashes
any state that the hardware may have been preserving.
So, there's no no real difference between SUSPEND and HIBERNATE modes
unless drivers do more than that bare minimum.
The more intelligent drivers will leverage hardware low power states,
and be able to use one of potentially many "retention" modes. Those
are the drivers which may well support wakeup events; issuing wakeups
requiress the device to stay at least partially functional.
- Dave
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-02 3:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-01 7:29 A minimally power-aware driver treats all messages as SUSPEND? Uwe Kleine-König
2008-07-01 14:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-07-01 15:14 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2008-07-01 15:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-07-02 1:08 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-07-02 2:57 ` David Brownell [this message]
2008-07-01 16:43 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200807011957.24354.david-b@pacbell.net \
--to=david-b@pacbell.net \
--cc=Uwe.Kleine-Koenig@digi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox