On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 11:41 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > No, because acpi doesn't know at build time whether it can actually do > S4 or not. Actually, you could probably do it by making some weak symbol for it that only ACPI overrides, and then check in the ACPI code if S4 is possible, otherwise somehow invoke the old symbol or copy the code or something. Seems a bit more fragile though. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- From: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
- Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.21 reiserfs -- cicular locking?
- Next by Date: Re: Back to the future.
- Previous by thread: Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- Next by thread: Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)
- Index(es):