Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752355AbXLZPYX (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Dec 2007 10:24:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751466AbXLZPYI (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Dec 2007 10:24:08 -0500 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.191]:33851 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751279AbXLZPYF (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Dec 2007 10:24:05 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=xoOyLQgVVkDjgqX3fMuPNn2LLYW4Z/v9c/gEOrTtQ5bpvEdWYQZTWM15yVKs4bsienk+m8egZAEDAW+Ute6TH2iE6mhEM6S9Rvgl4jStaKOqJdllICr7LUqmpf2M6Sr49fKkP/4mRiNToANttXKQW/9k2q8UavMAlY9VMMsfNQw= Message-ID: <47727216.4050003@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 18:24:06 +0300 From: Alexey Starikovskiy User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" CC: Linus Torvalds , Carlos Corbacho , "H. Peter Anvin" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Greg KH , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Len Brown , Andrew Morton , pm list , ACPI Devel Maling List Subject: Re: Suspend code ordering (again) References: <200712231419.40207.carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk> <200712251713.13223.rjw@sisk.pl> <200712261607.18429.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: <200712261607.18429.rjw@sisk.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1340 Lines: 35 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, 26 of December 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> On Tue, 25 Dec 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >>> the ACPI specification between versions 1.0x and 2.0. Namely, while ACPI >>> 2.0 and later wants us to put devices into low power states before calling >>> _PTS, ACPI 1.0x wants us to do that after calling _PTS. Since we're following >>> the 2.0 and later specifications right now, we're not doing the right thing for >>> the (strictly) ACPI 1.0x-compliant systems. >>> >>> We ought to be able to fix things on the high level, by calling _PTS earlier on >>> systems that claim to be ACPI 1.0x-compliant. That will require us to modify >>> the generic susped code quite a bit and will need to be tested for some time. >>> >> That's insane. Are you really saying that ACPI wants totally different >> orderings for different versions of the spec? >> > > Yes, I am. > > >> And does Windows really do that? >> > > I don't know. > Windows was compliant only with 1.x spec until Vista. With Vista claims are 3.x compliance. -- 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/