On Friday, 28 of March 2008, Len Brown wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Shaohua Li wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 09:24 +0000, Carlos Corbacho wrote:
> > > > +static int __init asus_suspend_order(const struct dmi_system_id *d)
> > > > +{
> > > > + printk(KERN_WARNING PREFIX "%s detected, "
> > > > + "acpi_new_pts_ordering is force enabled\n", d->ident);
> > > > + new_pts_ordering = true;
> > > > + return 0;
> > >
> > > Given all you're doing here is just changing the ordering,
> > > 'asus_suspend_order' doesn't strike me as the right name for this function
> > > since:
> > >
> > > 1) This clearly isn't the case for all Asus boards.
> > >
> > > 2) Perhaps something like 'new_suspend_order' would be a better name for
> > > this function (e.g. if others want to use DMI to do this for non-Asus
> > > boards).
> > Makes sense. I changed it.
>
> There doesn't appear to be anyting particularly "new" about the ACPI implementation on this laptop
>
> [000h 000 4] Signature : "FACP" /* Fixed ACPI Description Table */
> [004h 004 4] Table Length : 00000084
> [008h 008 1] Revision : 02
>
> FADT revision 2 is from _before_ ACPI 2.0.
So in theory it should work with the suspend ordering we use by default right
now. :-)
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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
