Hi, On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 06:58:15PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Hi, > > As indicated in a recent thread on Linux-PM, it's necessary to call > pm_ops->finish() before devce_resume(), but enable_nonboot_cpus() has to be > called before pm_ops->finish() > (cf. http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/linux-pm/2006-November/004164.html). > For consistency, it seems reasonable to call disable_nonboot_cpus() after > device_suspend(). > > This way the suspend code will remain symmetrical with respect to the resume > code and it may allow us to speed up things in the future by suspending and > resuming devices and/or saving the suspend image in many threads. Good. A thread to do progress bars :-) > The first patch changes the ordering of the suspend-to-RAM code and is > untested, because my boxes continue refusing to resume from RAM for other > reasons. If anyone can, please do me a favour and test it. > > The second patch changes the ordering of the built-in suspend-to-disk code, > and the last two patches modify the swsusp userland interface code > accordingly. As far as the last patch is concerned, I've decided to change > the existing ioctls, so that the patched kernel works with the "old" userland. > I don't think this change breaks anything of importance, but if it does, we > can just add (yet) another ioctl to set the platform mode, although in that > case the userland would have to be changed as well. > > All of the patches are against 2.6.20-rc1 and should not be used with any > earlier kernel. I'll test them, but probably not this year :-( I'll only get to it during the first week of January. -- Stefan Seyfried QA / R&D Team Mobile Devices | "Any ideas, John?" SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nürnberg | "Well, surrounding them's out." - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
