[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3319219.i7p5TE6seQ@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 15:54:32 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3][update] PM / sleep: Introduce command line argument for sleep state enumeration
On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 12:55:29 PM Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > For this reason I'm considering changing the defaul behavior going forward (so
> > that "mem" is always present and means "the deepest sleep state available other
> > than hibernation"), but I don't want to do that in one go.
>
> Actually, I don't think that's good idea, at least on PC.
>
> The way to wake up from S3 is power button. The way to wake up from
> "echo freeze > state" is going to be different, right?
No, it isn't. That's the point among other things.
> If I disable S3 in the BIOS and get different result from "echo mem >
> state", that will be confusing.
It may or may not be, depending on how different the handling of the states
is. It shouldn't be much different.
> Similar (but less severe) problem is there with S1, as it will
> probably power down USB ports, etc.
Hmm. S1 is implemented very rarely AFAICS and usually it works in analogy
with suspend-to-idle, but in the firmware.
> So for example if I have system with S1, learn to do "echo mem >
> state" and that it still charges my phone, then ACPI updates come and
> "echo mem > state" now puts it in S3 and not charging my phone -- that
> would be confusing.
Yes, it would.
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