Re: Hibernation considerations

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >Part of the problem here is that ACPI already has its own terminology,
> >and you're trying to invent a new one instead of using the existing
> >one.
> >
> >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?
> 
> >You have to understand that the ACPI spec is weird and complex.  The
> >mere fact that you have written a system image to disk changes the way
> >ACPI regards the shutdown procedure.  Even though you may treat all the
> >devices and the rest of the hardware exactly the same, it's a different
> >operation as far as ACPI is concerned, with different requirements.
> >
> >Yes, it's bizarre.  Why do you think so many people have complained so
> >vehemently about ACPI for all these years?
> 
> so let's act as if ACPI doesn't exist and make a suspend-to-disk that 
> works without it and looks to ACPI like a complete power off/on cycle (but 
> looks to the user like a suspend/resume cycle)

...if you act as if ACPI does not exist, you'll loose AC/battery power
status upon resume, and maybe more, because ACPI handles that.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/