[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061108234729.GB23816@elf.ucw.cz>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 00:47:29 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] S2RAM and PCI quirks
On Wed 2006-11-08 22:18:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, 8 November 2006 17:01, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Ar Mer, 2006-11-08 am 16:48 +0100, ysgrifennodd Arjan van de Ven:
> > > at the same time I'm not 100% convinced it's ok to always run all quirks
> > > at resume, for one the difference is that there now is a driver active
> > > owning the device... Almost sounds like having a per quirk flag stating
> > > "run at resume" is needed ;-(
> >
> > We probably need a quirk class for resume in this situation. The kind of
> > things that worry me if we are not doing the quirk handling, and what I
> > suspect happened in the case I looked at are that chipset bug
> > workarounds did not get restored, and in this case the older VIA chipset
> > involved then corrupted DMA streams and trashed the users disk.
>
> Now that would explain why many boxes resume from disk correctly, but don't
> resume from RAM by any means.
Well, there are other good reasons, too. (suspend-to-disk resume works
with hardware in mostly-initialized state, while suspend-to-ram resume
works with hardware in mostly-weird state). Yes, per-quirk "run me on
resume-from-ram" is probably the way forward.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists