On Sunday 22 March 2009, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Sunday 22 March 2009, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > > >> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> > >>> Well, why don't you implement the platform suspend operations for Xen? > >>> I guess you don't want ACPI _PTS to be executed during suspend as well. > >>> > >>> > >> I don't know. What's _PTS? > >> > > > > It's an ACPI method called to prepare the platform to enter the sleep state > > (the name stands for "prepare to sleep"). Executing it may affect the > > hardware. > > > > OK, that's what we want. Dom0 is the control domain which is > responsible for the bulk of the hardware; Xen itself has very little > hardware knowledge. > > > I think you really should not execute any global ACPI methods to suspend a > > guest, because that may affect the host. That's why I think it's better to > > regard Xen as a platform and implement a separate set of suspend operations for > > it. > > > > In this case we're talking about the special privileged domain which can > be considered to be on the "host" side of the line. > > That said, I'd be interested in looking at a suspend operations-based > approach if you think its the right way to go. But I'm concerned that > we'd end up with a big set of very similar-looking parallel functions > just to deal with some difference in detail near the bottom. Can you > give me a pointer to where this gets put together for acpi? Please have a look at include/linux/suspend.h for the prototypes and drivers/acpi/sleep.c contains the ACPI implementation. 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
