From: Pavel M. <pa...@uc...> - 2003-02-18 21:43:55
|
Hi! > > void __init acpi_reserve_bootmem(void) > > { > > acpi_wakeup_address = (unsigned long)alloc_bootmem_low(PAGE_SIZE); > > + if (!acpi_wakeup_address) > > + printk(KERN_ERR "ACPI: Cannot allocate lowmem. S3 disabled.\n"); > > if ((&wakeup_end - &wakeup_start) > PAGE_SIZE) > > printk(KERN_CRIT "ACPI: Wakeup code way too big, will crash on attempt to suspend\n"); > > - printk(KERN_DEBUG "ACPI: have wakeup address 0x%8.8lx\n", acpi_wakeup_address); > > If you say you're disabling S3, then please really do so and flip the bit > in the sleep_states[] array. Check the code, there's a conditional former in the file and S3 will correctly fail. I don't feel like flipping bits from here (arch-dep-code) in generic code. > > --- clean/drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c 2003-02-15 18:51:17.000000000 +0100 > > +++ linux/drivers/acpi/sleep/main.c 2003-02-15 18:57:27.000000000 +0100 > > @@ -103,6 +103,10 @@ > > return error; > > } > > > > + error = device_suspend(state, SUSPEND_DISABLE); > > + if (error) > > + panic("Sorry, devices really should know how to disable\n"); > > + > > Why is every error condition a panic()? That certainly does not add > robustness to the code.. > > Also, you say that the APIC needs this state. I wonder if that should be > done in the SUSPEND_POWER_DOWN stage with interrupts disabled? Good idea. So acpi_system_save_state can no longer be called with S5, right? That allows quite a lot of cleanup. Hmm, how do you propose error handling when SUSPEND_DISABLE fails? Call SUSPEND_ENABLE or not? Once that is decided panic can go. But I still think that just should not happen. Pavel -- Casualities in World Trade Center: ~3k dead inside the building, cryptography in U.S.A. and free speech in Czech Republic. |