On Thursday, 5 July 2007 02:15, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Rafael J. Wysocki writes: > > > This is incompatible with the code in kernel/power/main.c, since we only > > disable the nonboot CPUs after devices have been suspended. Do you think that > > your framework can be modified to work without disabling the nonboot CPUs > > by the user space? > > Sure. It was a "if it can be done in userspace, do it in userspace" > kind of decision, but I'm not wedded to it. > > I actually do want to converge to using the generic suspend-to-ram > code on powerbooks. I just want to avoid causing regressions for > powerbook users, including myself. :) Okay, but my question is this: Would that be possible, within your framework, to disable the nonboot CPUs _after_ suspending devices? Can you please point me to your high-level suspend code? Greetings, Rafael -- "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
