From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2992982AbXDRSM2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:12:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S2992984AbXDRSM2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:12:28 -0400 Received: from mail.tmr.com ([64.65.253.246]:41891 "EHLO gaimboi.tmr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2992982AbXDRSM1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:12:27 -0400 Message-ID: <46265F60.4040600@tmr.com> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 14:11:44 -0400 From: Bill Davidsen Organization: TMR Associates Inc, Schenectady NY User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061105 SeaMonkey/1.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Robert P. J. Day" CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , pm list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Kill off legacy power management stuff. References: <200704131022.45315.rjw@sisk.pl> <46254666.2020308@tmr.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Bill Davidsen wrote: > > >> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >>> [appropriate CCs added] >>> >>> On Friday, 13 April 2007 02:33, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >>> >>>> just something i threw together, not in final form, but it represents >>>> tossing the legacy PM stuff. at the moment, the menuconfig entry for >>>> PM_LEGACY lists it as "DEPRECATED", while the help screen calls it >>>> "obsolete." that's a good sign that it's getting close to the time >>>> for it to go, and the removal is fairly straightforward, but there's >>>> no mention of its removal in the feature removal schedule file. >>>> >>> It's been like this for a long long time. I think you're right that it can >>> be >>> dropped, but I don't know the details (eg. why it hasn't been dropped yet). >>> >>> >> One reason was that there are (were?) a number of machines which only powered >> down properly using apm. It was discussed as part of shutting down after power >> failure when your UPS is running out of power. >> > > um ... what does APM have to do with legacy PM? two different issues, > no? > Since the patches are going into apm.c and apm was used for suspend and poweroff before ACPI was a feature of the hardware, I assume there's a relationship. As of 2.6.9 ACPI still couldn't power down one of my old boxes, it hasn't been updated since that time, so I can't say what later kernels will do. -- bill davidsen CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979