Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 08 Dec 2005 09:14:30 -0500 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [ACPI] Re: RFC: ACPI/scsi/libata integration and hotswap |
| |
Alan Cox wrote: > On Iau, 2005-12-08 at 08:52 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 01:39:45PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> >>>On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 01:33:08PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Don't do it at all. We don't need to fuck up every layer and driver for >>>>intels braindamage. >>> >>>Doing SATA suspend/resume properly on x86 depends on knowing the ACPI >>>object that corresponds to a host or target. >> >>Not true. > > > > Actually he is right. You have to know the ACPI object in order to run > the _GTM/_STM etc functions. If you don't run those your suspend/resume
These are only for PATA. We don't care about _GTM/_STM on SATA.
Further, SATA completely resets and re-initializes the device as if from a hardware reset (except on ata_piix, which doesn't support COMRESET, and PATA). This makes _GTF uninteresting, as well.
> may not work, may corrupt and so on. The only safe alternative is to > disable acpi which, while it would have been a good idea before the spec > ever got out, is a bit late now.
suspend/resume works just fine with Jens' out-of-tree patch.
> If you don't run the resume methods your disk subsystem status after a > resume is simply undefined and unsafe.
I initialize the hardware to a defined state.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |