Hi! > >Part of the problem here is that ACPI already has its own terminology, > >and you're trying to invent a new one instead of using the existing > >one. > > > >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? > > >You have to understand that the ACPI spec is weird and complex. The > >mere fact that you have written a system image to disk changes the way > >ACPI regards the shutdown procedure. Even though you may treat all the > >devices and the rest of the hardware exactly the same, it's a different > >operation as far as ACPI is concerned, with different requirements. > > > >Yes, it's bizarre. Why do you think so many people have complained so > >vehemently about ACPI for all these years? > > so let's act as if ACPI doesn't exist and make a suspend-to-disk that > works without it and looks to ACPI like a complete power off/on cycle (but > looks to the user like a suspend/resume cycle) ...if you act as if ACPI does not exist, you'll loose AC/battery power status upon resume, and maybe more, because ACPI handles that. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
