On Sat, 2008-04-26 at 12:37 -0700, David Brownell wrote: > On Tuesday 22 April 2008, Zhao Yakui wrote: > > Agree with what Rui said. The patch doesn't change the time when GPEs > > are enabled/disabled. > > So you also think my worries were unfounded? OK, I'm happy > to hear that. It means the userspace model for wakeup events > on PCs can become one that non-ACPI platforms can use too. > > In which case ... I'll resend this patch with a more concise > summary and a signed-off-by line. > > > > But after the patch is applied, some PCI device(the ACPI device with the > > _PRW object) can wake the sleeping system by default. And it is totally > > opposite to the current flowchart. > > That's not true. Behavior could only change for devices with > drivers which already call pci_enable_wake()! Yes. But in fact a lot of PCI device will call pci_enable_wake when the system enters the suspend state. And the behaviour will be changed. > What's different is that /proc/acpi/wakeup is being taken > partially out of the decision loop ... in favor of (a) driver > model flags, which work on platforms without ACPI, and also > (b) device driver logic, which in any case really needs to > be prepared to request and otherwise manage the wake events. > Yes. What your said is right. If your patch is applied, whether the PCI device can wake the sleeping system is controlled by device driver. In such case the /proc/acpi/wakeup will be useless. > If someone sets /proc/acpi/wakeup flags for a device, it > could still be made to issue wake events for devices with > drivers that don't expect (or handle) those events. > > - Dave _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
