On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 13:26 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > > Some systems don't support the ACPI_LPS0_ENTRY and ACPI_LPS0_EXIT > functions in their Low Power S0 Idle _DSM, but still expect EC > events to be processed in the suspend-to-idle state for power button > wakeup (among other things) to work. Surface Pro3 turns out to be > one of them. > > Fortunately, it still provides Low Power S0 Idle _DSM with the screen > on/off functions supported, so modify the ACPI suspend-to-idle to use > the Low Power S0 Idle code path for all systems supporting the > ACPI_LPS0_ENTRY and ACPI_LPS0_EXIT or the ACPI_LPS0_SCREEN_OFF and > ACPI_LPS0_SCREEN_ON functions in their Low Power S0 Idle _DSM. > > Potentially, that will cause more systems to use suspend-to-idle by > default, so some future corrections may be necessary if it leads > to issues, but let it remain more straightforward for now. > -#define ACPI_S2IDLE_FUNC_MASK ((1 << ACPI_LPS0_ENTRY) | (1 << > ACPI_LPS0_EXIT)) > +#define ACPI_LPS0_SCREEN_MASK ((1 << ACPI_LPS0_SCREEN_OFF) | > (1 << ACPI_LPS0_SCREEN_ON)) > +#define ACPI_LPS0_S2I_MASK ((1 << ACPI_LPS0_ENTRY) | (1 << > ACPI_LPS0_EXIT)) Just a nitpick: Can we leave S2IDLE instead of S2I? Would it make sense for potential code readers? -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Intel Finland Oy -- 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
