From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S939216AbXG3HRm (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:17:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S938761AbXG3HRc (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:17:32 -0400 Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:50620 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762748AbXG3HR3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:17:29 -0400 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Introduce CONFIG_HIBERNATION and CONFIG_SUSPEND (updated) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:25:59 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: Len Brown , david@lang.hm, Andrew Morton , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Machek , Adrian Bunk , Stefan Richter , Nigel Cunningham , pm list , Andi Kleen References: <200707251238.50218.lenb@kernel.org> <200707292323.29601.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200707300926.00653.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday, 30 July 2007 02:21, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > 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 only found two really minor issues covered by the appended patch (on top of the current -git). > 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. Well, IMO, for now let's make sure everything works as is. :-) Greetings, Rafael --- (1) I think it's better to use CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP instead of CONFIG_PM_SLEEP in include/acpi/acpi_bus.h , too, for consistency. (2) x86_64 defconfig is outdated Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki --- arch/x86_64/defconfig | 3 --- include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 6 +++--- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) Index: linux-2.6/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h 2007-07-30 07:58:48.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-2.6/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h 2007-07-30 08:25:32.000000000 +0200 @@ -366,16 +366,16 @@ acpi_handle acpi_get_child(acpi_handle, acpi_handle acpi_get_pci_rootbridge_handle(unsigned int, unsigned int); #define DEVICE_ACPI_HANDLE(dev) ((acpi_handle)((dev)->archdata.acpi_handle)) -#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP int acpi_pm_device_sleep_state(struct device *, int, int *); -#else /* !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP */ +#else /* !CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP */ static inline int acpi_pm_device_sleep_state(struct device *d, int w, int *p) { if (p) *p = ACPI_STATE_D0; return ACPI_STATE_D3; } -#endif /* !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP */ +#endif /* !CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP */ #endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */ Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86_64/defconfig =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86_64/defconfig 2007-07-30 07:58:48.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86_64/defconfig 2007-07-30 08:27:27.000000000 +0200 @@ -207,9 +207,6 @@ CONFIG_SUSPEND_SMP=y # ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) Support # CONFIG_ACPI=y -CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=y -CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP_PROC_FS=y -CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP_PROC_SLEEP=y CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS=y CONFIG_ACPI_AC=y CONFIG_ACPI_BATTERY=y