From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Chua Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] ACPI: Fixes and cleanups related to iomaps management Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 08:14:57 +0800 Message-ID: References: <201101201226.41021.rjw@sisk.pl> <201101221025.49327.rjw@sisk.pl> <201101222012.14028.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201101222012.14028.rjw@sisk.pl> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List , Linux-pm mailing list , LKML List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Saturday, January 22, 2011, Jeff Chua wrote: >> 2011/1/22 Rafael J. Wysocki : >> > On Saturday, January 22, 2011, Jeff Chua wrote: >> >> > means that my patch [11/11] _and_ the replacement are totally wrong, b= ecause you have >> > _multiple_ NVS regions. =A0That really helped, thanks a lot. >> >> Would it be different if I offline all CPUs before suspending to ram? >> It seems to help with suspending to disk. > > No, that doesn't matter. =A0NVS regions are just sitting there regardless= of > what happens at run time. Strange. If I didn't offline, it hanged during suspend even without thinkpad_acpi. I could see that the suspend code does the offline automatically, but executing the offline before calling suspend makes it no hanging. Jeff