On Thu, 2009-03-19 at 09:21 +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 09:16:07AM +0800, yakui_zhao wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 21:41 +0800, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > Do we have any idea what's going on here, yet? > > > Several of the machines > > > on this blacklist are modern, so it's not a workaround for ancient > > > hardware. > > Now we have no idea how the behaviour is changed with the boot option. > > In fact the boot option is useful for all the boxes that can't be > > resumed unless it is added. > > > > Although the machine is modern, the ACPI 1.0 is followed on this box. > > Without the boot option of "acpi_sleep=old_ordering", it can't be > > resumed from S3 correctly. But after adding the boot option, the box can > > be resumed. > > Yes. So how do we tell which ordering a machine needs without having a > blacklist? Windows doesn't. If there exists the different behaviour w/o the boot option, maybe it should be added to the blacklist. Maybe there is no such blacklist on windows. I verify this problem on windows by using KVM and find that the _PTS object is called after device suspend in course of hibernate.(No S3 is supported on KVM). In theory the _PTS is also called after device suspend in course of suspend. But it is strange that suspend/resume can work well on windows XP. Maybe more registers are saved/restored in course of suspend. But we can't know what should be saved/restored. > -- 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
