On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 david@xxxxxxx wrote: > > I agree, it would be good to have a non-ACPI-specific hibernation mode, > > something which would look to ACPI like a normal shutdown. But I'm not > > so sure this is possible. > > why would it not be possible? > I can't think of anything much more frustrating then thinking that I > suspended a system and then discovering that becouse the battery went dead > (a complete power loss) that the system wouldn't boot up properly. to me > this would be a fairly common condition (when I'm mobile I use the machine > until I am out of battery, then stop and it may be a long time (days) > before I can charge the thing up again) this would not be a reliable > suspend as far as I'm concerned. > > for suspend-to-ram you have to worry about ACPI states and what you are > doing with them, for suspend-to-disk you can ignore them and completely > power the system off instead. If the only problem with doing this would be lack of wakeup support then I'm all for it. There must be a lot of people who would like their computers to hibernate with power drain as close to 0 as possible and who don't care about remote wakeup. In fact they might even prefer not to have wakeup support, so the computer doesn't resume at unexpected times. Alan Stern _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
