From: Ducrot Bruno <ducrot@poupinou.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: "Grover, Andrew" <andrew.grover@intel.com>,
ducrot@poupinou.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [ACPI] Re: [PATCH] s4bios for 2.5.59 + apci-20030123
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 21:05:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030205200521.GN1205@poup.poupinou.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030204221003.GA250@elf.ucw.cz>
On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:10:04PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > This patch is for s4bios support in 2.5.59 with acpi-20030123.
> > >
> > > This is the 'minimal' requirement. Some devices (especially the
> > > IDE part) are not well resumed. Handle with care..
> > >
> > > Note also that the resuming part (I mean IDE) was more stable
> > > with an equivalent patch when I tested with 2.5.54 (grumble
> > > grumble)...
> > >
> > > I think also that it is a 'good' checker for devices power management
> > > in general...
> >
> > I'd really rather just have S4OS (aka swsusp) in 2.5 patches -- if the
> > OS can do S4 on its own, that is really preferable to S4bios.
>
> Well, we already have S4OS, and having S4OS does not mean we can't
> have S4bios.
>
> Some people apparently want slower suspend/resume but have all caches
> intact when resumed. Thats not easy for swsusp but they can have that
> with S4bios. And S4bios is usefull for testing device support; it
> seems to behave slightly differently to S3 meaning better testing.
>
Yep, correct. The problem is that now I have more trouble with s4bios
in general with 2.5. That worked more reliability with 'older' 2.5 series.
Really don't know why.
Cheers,
--
Ducrot Bruno
-- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy?
-- Don't know. Don't care.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-05 19:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-04 1:25 [PATCH] s4bios for 2.5.59 + apci-20030123 Grover, Andrew
2003-02-04 22:10 ` Pavel Machek
2003-02-05 20:05 ` Ducrot Bruno [this message]
2003-02-05 20:41 ` [ACPI] " Nigel Cunningham
2003-02-06 10:16 ` Ducrot Bruno
2003-02-06 19:41 ` Nigel Cunningham
2003-02-06 21:05 ` Ducrot Bruno
2003-02-07 3:57 ` Nigel Cunningham
2003-02-07 16:00 ` Pavel Machek
2003-02-09 19:42 ` Nigel Cunningham
2003-02-06 15:37 ` Pavel Machek
2003-02-06 19:44 ` Nigel Cunningham
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030205200521.GN1205@poup.poupinou.org \
--to=ducrot@poupinou.org \
--cc=acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=andrew.grover@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).