lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 1/6] ACPI: Introduce ACPI D3_COLD state support
    Date
    On Monday, February 13, 2012, Lin Ming wrote:
    > From: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
    >
    > If a device has _PR3._ON, it means the device supports D3_HOT.
    > If a device has _PR3._OFF, it means the device supports D3_COLD.
    > Add the ability to validate and enter D3_COLD state in ACPI.
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>

    This is supposed to be ACPI 5.0 support, right?

    So can anyone please tell me what part of the ACPI 5.0 spec is the
    basis of this patch, because I can't see that immediately?

    The only places where D3Cold is _mentioned_ are Section 7.2.12 (_PRE, which
    appears to be new in 5.0), Section 7.2.20 (_S0W), Section 7.2.21 (_S1W),
    Section 7.2.22 (_S2W), Section 7.2.23 (_S3W) and Section 7.2.24 (_S4W).
    None of them mentions those _PR3._ON and _PR3._OFF things above.

    Moreover, my understanding of the spec is that D3Cold means all of the
    power resources returned by _PR3 are "off" (whereas some of them will be
    "on" in D3hot).

    > ---
    > drivers/acpi/power.c | 4 ++--
    > drivers/acpi/scan.c | 10 +++++++++-
    > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
    >
    > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/power.c b/drivers/acpi/power.c
    > index 9ac2a9f..0d681fb 100644
    > --- a/drivers/acpi/power.c
    > +++ b/drivers/acpi/power.c
    > @@ -500,14 +500,14 @@ int acpi_power_transition(struct acpi_device *device, int state)
    > {
    > int result;
    >
    > - if (!device || (state < ACPI_STATE_D0) || (state > ACPI_STATE_D3))
    > + if (!device || (state < ACPI_STATE_D0) || (state > ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD))
    > return -EINVAL;
    >
    > if (device->power.state == state)
    > return 0;
    >
    > if ((device->power.state < ACPI_STATE_D0)
    > - || (device->power.state > ACPI_STATE_D3))
    > + || (device->power.state > ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD))
    > return -ENODEV;
    >
    > /* TBD: Resources must be ordered. */
    > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/scan.c b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
    > index 8ab80ba..a9d4391 100644
    > --- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c
    > +++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
    > @@ -881,8 +881,16 @@ static int acpi_bus_get_power_flags(struct acpi_device *device)
    >
    > device->power.flags.power_resources = 1;
    > ps->flags.valid = 1;
    > - for (j = 0; j < ps->resources.count; j++)
    > + for (j = 0; j < ps->resources.count; j++) {
    > acpi_bus_add_power_resource(ps->resources.handles[j]);
    > + /* Check for D3_COLD support. _PR3._OFF equals D3_COLD ? */
    > + if (i == ACPI_STATE_D3) {
    > + if (j == 0)
    > + device->power.states[ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD].flags.valid = 1;
    > + status = acpi_get_handle(ps->resources.handles[j], "_OFF", &handle);
    > + device->power.states[ACPI_STATE_D3_COLD].flags.valid &= ACPI_SUCCESS(status);
    > + }
    > + }

    Sorry, but this doesn't make sense to me. Power resources always have
    the _OFF method, right?

    > }
    >
    > /* Evaluate "_PSx" to see if we can do explicit sets */
    >

    Rafael


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-02-13 21:23    [W:0.024 / U:32.556 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site