On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 02:17 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Not sure, it might be different for different suspend methods. We > > actually need to do some platform-function stuff inbetween, and if we > > ever want some S4-like state then we might need to do it differently. > > Ah, OK Keep in mind that I don't know that yet, and am not totally sure I ever will implement something S4-like (it would probably require kexec or similar tricks). Also, these handlers are not even called fro the suspend to disk case right now (and documented that way.) I will repost with some BUG_ON() assertions, but should I change it to have 4 handlers before_irq_off/after_irq_off/before_irq_on/after_irq_on instead of the two I have now? johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
