Ok, I took this, and modified Len's patch to re-introduce ACPI_SLEEP on top of it (I took the easy way out, and just made PM_SLEEP imply ACPI_SLEEP, which should make everything come out right. I could have dropped ACPI_SLEEP entirely in favour of PM_SLEEP, but that would have implied changing more of Len's patch than I was really comfy with). Len, Rafael, please do check that the end result looks ok. I suspect ACPI could now take the PM_SLEEP/SUSPEND/HIBERNATE details into account, and that some of the code is not necessary when HIBERNATE is not selected, for example, but I'm not at all sure that it's worth it being very fine-grained. Linus _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
