On Thursday, February 21, 2008 4:54 pm Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, 22 of February 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > - if (state.event == PM_EVENT_SUSPEND) {
> > > + if (state.event == PM_EVENT_SUSPEND && !in_hibernation_power_off()) {
> >
> > I don't understand why hibernation just doesn't use a PM_EVENT_HIBERNATE,
> > and be done with it?
> >
> > Why should it be called PM_EVENT_SUSPEND when it isn't?
> >
> > Adding some external global variables is absolutely the wrong way to fix
> > this.
> >
> > It's not even like there are very many drivers who actually care about
> > "state.event" anyway: a 'git grep' returns just 35 users in the whole
> > tree, so if this was done this ugly way just to avoid double-chcking the
> > other cases that compare against PM_EVENT_SUSPEND, then it really wasn't
> > worth it.
>
> Please relax, we're debugging the thing right now and the patch doesn't
> even seem to help on the other affected box.
Actually, looks like I forgot to reboot between tests (just rmmod'd &
modprobed i915), your patch actually does work.
However, making new PM event messages might be a good thing anyway, assuming
Linus takes it for 2.6.25, since it should make the migration to ->hibernate
callbacks easier.
Jesse
-
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
