Hi Alexey, On Friday, 4 May 2007 06:34, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: > Rafael, > > code in prepare() and enter() is split as code with interrupts on and > code with interrupts off. I see. Still, the spec seems to suggest that _GTS should be executed with interrupts off, but we run it in the 'interrupts on' part of code. Isn't that wrong? > thus it doesn't quite follow a spec in regards of driver suspend. Yes. > Basically we need to either split it to smaller pieces or have hooks > to control interrupts/driver suspend from this code. I'd like to split it and I'd like to figure out *how* to do this. More precisely, I'd like to learn which part of acpi_pm_prepare() should be executed before device_suspend() and which part can be run after it. Analogously, I'd like to learn which part of acpi_pm_finish() needs to be run before device_resume() and which part can be (or should be) run after it. Greetings, Rafael > On 5/4/07, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Friday, 4 May 2007 00:57, Moore, Robert wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: linux-acpi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-acpi- > > > > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rafael J. Wysocki > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 1:02 PM > > > > To: ACPI Devel Maling List > > > > Cc: pm list; Pavel Machek > > > > Subject: Why don't we use _TTS method? > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I've got two questions regarding the implementation of the ACPI > > > > poweroff/sleep > > > > code in drivers/acpi/sleep and drivers/acpi/hardware . > > > > > > > > 1) We don't seem to use the _TTS system-control method, although the > > > ACPI > > > > specification (ACPI 3.0b) says that this method should be used for > > > > intiating > > > > and finishing power transitions. Could you please tell me why we > > > don't > > > > use it? > > > > > > > [Moore, Robert] > > > > > > Probably because it's fairly new and it takes a long time for these > > > things to appear in real machines. Also, needs to be supported in > > > Windows before we ever see it in real machines. > > > > Hmm, it already was in the 3.0 spec from 2004, so it doesn't seem to be > > that new. Still, I'm not an expert ... > > > > > > 2) In the functions acpi_enter_sleep_state_prep(), > > > > acpi_enter_sleep_state(), > > > > acpi_leave_sleep_state() we manipulate GPEs quite extensively (we > > > disable > > > > and enable them for a couple of times during a transition), although > > > the > > > > specification doesn't tell anything about that explicitly. Could you > > > > please > > > > explain to me what the purpose of that is? > > > > > > > [Moore, Robert] > > > > > > There a wake GPEs and runtime GPEs that need to be managed separately. > > > We want to make sure that only the "Wake" GPEs are enabled as we goto > > > sleep. > > > > I understand that, but the runtime GPEs seem to be disabled before we call > > device drivers' .suspend() routines (ie. before the devices are placed in the > > appropriate Dx states) and that's the point I don't quite get. Is there a > > technical reason for doing it in this particular place? > > > > Thanks a lot for your reply. > > > > Greetings, > > 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 > > > > -- If you don't have the time to read, you don't have the time or the tools to write. - Stephen King _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
