On Monday 01 November 2004 13:50, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 19:04 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Next try at typechecking for driver layer. I now actually use > > FREEZE/STANDBY/SUSPEND, altrough I'm not entirely convinced that it is > > good idea. [There seems to be very little difference between STANDBY > > and SUSPEND, so it is quite difficult to tell which one should be used > > when.] Erm, "freeze" was never supposed to be a PM state. And I thought that I took a fair amount of care to write up how "standby" differs from, for example, "suspend to RAM" ... > At this point, we use only suspend I suppose. Standby is just an attempt > at providing some more distinction for handhelds or such who may have a > "light" suspend mode with fast wakeup, but it may not make sense ... APM talks about "standby" (resembling S1) and "suspend" (resembling S3). Also "hibernate" (resembling S4). Ignoring "standby" states would IMO be a good way to ensure that Linux PM continues to be inadequate on the hardware that needs PM the most ... :( - Dave
