Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759262AbZCSHSm (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 03:18:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753208AbZCSHSc (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 03:18:32 -0400 Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.170]:33680 "EHLO wf-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750722AbZCSHSb convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 03:18:31 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=qdG5pLvfZtSoJEzeBqeGT/t4lS5LabLIhkZzn8J7hdHSYFyWFCvnr96MRyThpaJKZc MuwA11P9VYrwWtfCS+7kAS0LkUp/97vd+scMPAmD0GIRb4LT8Go/ZIMiJ+OBPV/gRe0u 8WyiAhT6d+Rbxu92PM1kw4FaFQ8J2D9kVXK9U= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <49C1EE7D.5070507@linux.intel.com> References: <2a27d3730903172325w16ec329cp872ec35d100f6506@mail.gmail.com> <200903190000.33572.rjw@sisk.pl> <49C1EE7D.5070507@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:18:27 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: a7632c5f90bae2da Message-ID: <2a27d3730903190018h1a0f5b6asf5cf2002fe3504fb@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: nonboot cpu on SMP suspend From: Li Yang To: chen gong Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1076 Lines: 27 On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:04 PM, chen gong wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki 写道: >> >> On Wednesday 18 March 2009, Li Yang wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'm curious why we need to un-plug all the nonboot cpus before suspend >>> and start them all over again after the suspend(ACPI sleep)?  I mean >>> if we can bring the booting cpu back to the exact state as before >>> suspend, why can't we just do the same for non-booting cpus?  And that >>> will be much faster.  Any thought?  Thanks. >> >> Because we need to enter the BIOS with one CPU on-line only. >> > You mean only one CPU can be supported by BIOS when suspend/resume ? If so, is it a defect of x86 BIOS? And is it true that for other architectures without a BIOS there won't be such a limitation if the boot code is sane? Thanks - Leo -- 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/