On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 [email protected] wrote:
> > I agree, it would be good to have a non-ACPI-specific hibernation mode,
> > something which would look to ACPI like a normal shutdown. But I'm not
> > so sure this is possible.
>
> why would it not be possible?
> I can't think of anything much more frustrating then thinking that I
> suspended a system and then discovering that becouse the battery went dead
> (a complete power loss) that the system wouldn't boot up properly. to me
> this would be a fairly common condition (when I'm mobile I use the machine
> until I am out of battery, then stop and it may be a long time (days)
> before I can charge the thing up again) this would not be a reliable
> suspend as far as I'm concerned.
>
> for suspend-to-ram you have to worry about ACPI states and what you are
> doing with them, for suspend-to-disk you can ignore them and completely
> power the system off instead.
If the only problem with doing this would be lack of wakeup support
then I'm all for it. There must be a lot of people who would like
their computers to hibernate with power drain as close to 0 as possible
and who don't care about remote wakeup. In fact they might even prefer
not to have wakeup support, so the computer doesn't resume at
unexpected times.
Alan Stern
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
