Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759940AbXIUOSj (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:18:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758568AbXIUOSd (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:18:33 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:43206 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751928AbXIUOSc (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:18:32 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: "huang ying" Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec jump Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 16:31:18 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , "Nigel Cunningham" , nigel@suspend2.net, "Kexec Mailing List" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Huang, Ying" , "Andrew Morton" , "Jeremy Maitin-Shepard" , "Len Brown" References: <1190266447.21818.17.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> <200709211409.25008.rjw@sisk.pl> <851fc09e0709210614q33cf3c81u1441fda17a66a6fd@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <851fc09e0709210614q33cf3c81u1441fda17a66a6fd@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200709211631.19130.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1818 Lines: 39 On Friday, 21 September 2007 15:14, huang ying wrote: > On 9/21/07, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday, 21 September 2007 05:33, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > Nigel Cunningham writes: [--snip--] > > > > > > No one has yet attacked the hard problem of coming up with separate > > > hibernate methods for drivers. > > > > Well, I've been playing a bit with that for some time, but it's not easy by any > > means. > > > > In short, I'm seeing some problems related to the handling of ACPI that seem to > > shatter the entire idea of having separate hibernate methods, at least as far > > as ACPI systems are concerned. > > So sadly to hear this. Can you details it a little? Or a link? Well, the problem is that apparently some systems (eg. my HP nx6325) expect us to execute the _PTS ACPI global control method before creating the image _and_ to execute acpi_enter_sleep_state(ACPI_STATE_S4) in order to finally put the system into the sleep state. In particular, on nx6325, if we don't do that, then after the restore the status of the AC power will not be reported correctly (and if you replace the battery while in the sleep state, the battery status will not be updated correctly after the restore). Similar issues have been reported for other machines. Now, the ACPI specification requires us to put devices into low power states before executing _PTS and that's exactly what we're doing before a suspend to RAM. Thus, it seems that in general we need to do the same for hibernation on ACPI systems. Greetings, Rafael - 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/