On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 5:06 AM David E. Box <david.e.box@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2023-06-01 at 20:46 -0500, Limonciello, Mario wrote: > > > > On 6/1/2023 8:31 PM, David E. Box wrote: > > > On Thu, 2023-06-01 at 18:39 -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote: > > > > In Windows the Microsoft _DSM doesn't call functions 3->5->7 for suspend > > > > and 8->6->4 for resume like Linux currently does. > > > > > > > > Rather it calls 3->7->5 for suspend and 6->8->4 for resume. > > > > Align this calling order for Linux as well. > > > > > > > > Link: > > > > https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/device-experiences/modern-standby-states > > > I didn't catch the ordering in the link. > > > > Yeah it's tough to interpret from the link, because the picture at the > > bottom > > is missing annotations. > > > > Basically if you look at the picture the blue part is the screen on/off. > > > > The green part is "modern standby" and then the little "humps" are LPS0 > > enter/exit. > > > > > Was there any issue that prompted this > > > change? > > > > > > We were debugging an unrelated problem and noticed the difference > > comparing the > > > > BIOS debugging log from Windows and Linux. > > > > If an OEM depends on this call order in that code used in LPS0 phase > > requires > > changes from MS phase I could hypothesize this fixes it. > > > > > > > David > > > > BTW - is there interest in supporting the Microsoft _DSM GUID for Intel > > side too? > > > > It's an incongruity today that we run both AMD GUID and Microsoft GUID > > for AMD systems > > but only run Intel GUID for Intel systems. > > There hasn't been a need yet. Rafael have you look at it? Nothing official ATM AFAICS. But I guess it'll need to be used on Intel at one point too.
