Re: Hibernation considerations

[Alan Stern]

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 david@xxxxxxx wrote:

> > I agree, it would be good to have a non-ACPI-specific hibernation mode,
> > something which would look to ACPI like a normal shutdown.  But I'm not
> > so sure this is possible.
> 
> why would it not be possible?

> I can't think of anything much more frustrating then thinking that I 
> suspended a system and then discovering that becouse the battery went dead 
> (a complete power loss) that the system wouldn't boot up properly. to me 
> this would be a fairly common condition (when I'm mobile I use the machine 
> until I am out of battery, then stop and it may be a long time (days) 
> before I can charge the thing up again) this would not be a reliable 
> suspend as far as I'm concerned.
> 
> for suspend-to-ram you have to worry about ACPI states and what you are 
> doing with them, for suspend-to-disk you can ignore them and completely 
> power the system off instead.

If the only problem with doing this would be lack of wakeup support
then I'm all for it.  There must be a lot of people who would like
their computers to hibernate with power drain as close to 0 as possible
and who don't care about remote wakeup.  In fact they might even prefer
not to have wakeup support, so the computer doesn't resume at
unexpected times.

Alan Stern

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/