| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 09:29:20 +0200 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> To: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com> Cc: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@....com>, Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andiry Xu <andiry.xu@....com>, Alex He <alex.he@....com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: evaluate _PS3 when entering D3 Cold On Sunday, April 01, 2012, Zhang Rui wrote: [...] > > How about this? > > We should use the term "D3" in general in Linux. I don't see why. We can refer to the "old D3" as D3_cold. > Without _PR3, OS should *assume* that the power is removed, although it > may be not true. That's correct. > With _PR3, OS can *assure* that the power is removed, because it knows > how to remove thw power (evaluating _PR3._OFF). I'd rather say that with _PR3 we have the opportunity to avoid removing power completely from the device. In other words, D3_hot is supported (and it is supported _only_ in that case). > So the difference is that OS need to make sure whether to evaluate > _PR3._OFF when _PR3 exists. For example, a device has _PR3, but _S0W > returns 3, OS should not evaluate _PR3._OFF when the device sleeps with > remote wakeup support. That's correct. > what do you think? Well, see above and my other message in this thread. Thanks, Rafael -- 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