From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932779Ab0E0Res (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2010 13:34:48 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:60863 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932535Ab0E0Req convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2010 13:34:46 -0400 Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8) From: Peter Zijlstra To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Alan Stern , Paul@smtp1.linux-foundation.org, LKML , Florian Mickler , felipe.balbi@nokia.com, Linux OMAP Mailing List , Linux PM , Alan Cox In-Reply-To: <20100527173118.GE2468@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20100527173118.GE2468@srcf.ucam.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 19:34:40 +0200 Message-ID: <1274981680.27810.5636.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 18:31 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Even if we could use suspend-via-deep-idle-state on PCs, ( see Alan Cox's argument on PCs ) > we still need to be able to enter suspend while the system isn't idle. _WHY_!? We've been trying to tell you you don't need that.