Re: [ACPI] s4bios

[Pavel M. <pa...@su...>]

Hi!

> > From: Pavel Machek [mailto:pa...@su...] 
> > > My sense was that s4bios was a transitional thing, and in 
> > all ways inferior
> > > to regular S4. For example, old versions of Windows 
> > supported S4bios but not
> > > S4, whereas Win2k and XP support S4 and drop S4bios support.
> > > 
> > > So yes it's defined in the spec, but do we *really* want to 
> > add support for
> > > this musty, weird little feature?
> > 
> > It may be slightly faster to resume, and if user already has 
> > S4bios partition,
> > it is easier to set it up.
> 
> How much faster might it be?

It does not do kernel bootup. OTOH, swsusp writes less data to disk.

> How many systems have a s4bios partition?

Anything with win98 preinstalled.

> I must say, I think the answers to these questions are "we don't know" and
> "not many", so I don't see how this justifies adding support. The fact that
> Microsoft dropped support for it also says to me we shouldn't
> bother.

You might be well right.
									Pavel
-- 
Casualities in World Trade Center: ~3k dead inside the building,
cryptography in U.S.A. and free speech in Czech Republic.