On Sat 2008-02-02 20:38:43, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > It would have been easier to just use the public interface and > > > hard-wire "rtc0". But going directly to the hardware was dirtier, > > > and more in the spirit of "hack that obviously shouldn't go upstream > > > until it gets done properly". > > > > Yes, it was "quick and dirty". And I do not think it is going upstream > > in this form...? > > which would be a pity - this thing _almost_ started doing suspend and > resume cycles on my testsystems, all by itself :-) ...which is good reason for me to create cleaned-up patch, right? wakeup in .c now works, so I actually have time to do it now. 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
