Alexey Starikovskiy schrieb:
Please remove error lines at the beginning of the file and try to
compile it again...
On 5/1/07, Markus Feldmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alexey Starikovskiy schrieb:
1. why do you think that making custom DSDT is going to help you?
2. please attach your
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 22:13 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
+void hibernation_set_ops(struct hibernation_ops *ops)
+{
+ if (ops !(ops-prepare ops-enter ops-finish)) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR Wrong definition of hibernation operations!
+ Using defaults\n);
+
On Thursday, 3 May 2007 10:41, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 22:13 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
+void hibernation_set_ops(struct hibernation_ops *ops)
+{
+ if (ops !(ops-prepare ops-enter ops-finish)) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR Wrong definition of hibernation
On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 11:46 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, BUG_ON() is extremely user-unfriendly, and it'd trigger even if the user
actually didn't intend to suspend at all.
Well, hibernation_set_ops is invoked whenever the user loads his ACPI
module with S4 possible, and typically
On Thursday, 3 May 2007 11:45, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 11:46 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, BUG_ON() is extremely user-unfriendly, and it'd trigger even if the
user
actually didn't intend to suspend at all.
Well, hibernation_set_ops is invoked whenever the
On Thu 2007-05-03 11:46:02, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Thursday, 3 May 2007 10:41, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 22:13 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
+void hibernation_set_ops(struct hibernation_ops *ops)
+{
+ if (ops !(ops-prepare ops-enter ops-finish)) {
+
On Thursday, 3 May 2007 12:11, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Thu 2007-05-03 11:46:02, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Thursday, 3 May 2007 10:41, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 22:13 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
+void hibernation_set_ops(struct hibernation_ops *ops)
+{
+
Hi.
Sorry for my quietness. Looks pretty straightforward to me :)
Nigel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 22:13 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
+extern inline int hibernate(void) { return -ENOSYS; }
and I don't think that will compile :)
(the extern doesn't seem to be consistent right now anyway. maybe just
kill them all?)
johannes
signature.asc
Description: This is a
On Thursday, 3 May 2007 14:12, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 22:13 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
extern void swsusp_unset_page_free(struct page *);
extern unsigned long get_safe_page(gfp_t gfp_mask);
+void hibernation_set_ops(struct hibernation_ops *ops);
+extern
On Thursday, 3 May 2007 14:13, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 22:13 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
+extern inline int hibernate(void) { return -ENOSYS; }
and I don't think that will compile :)
It will, but this is a mistake. It should be 'static', not 'extern'. Will
fix,
On 5/2/07, Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 2 May 2007 19:28, Guilherme Salgado wrote:
On 4/25/07, Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 April 2007 04:25, Guilherme Salgado wrote:
On 4/24/07, Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:17:18PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
#define INTEL_I820_RDCR 0x51
@@ -664,7 +671,7 @@
if ((pg_start + mem-page_count) num_entries)
goto out_err;
- /* The i830 can't check the GTT for entries since its read only,
+ /* The
On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 22:00 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
The fan control watchdog was being called in one place even when the fan
control operation had failed. Fix it.
I didn't have a closer look to the fan watchdog, but it looks like a
ThinkPad specific thing?
IMO we could need
On Thursday, 3 May 2007 15:45, Guilherme Salgado wrote:
On 5/2/07, Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 2 May 2007 19:28, Guilherme Salgado wrote:
On 4/25/07, Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 April 2007 04:25, Guilherme Salgado wrote:
(adding lm-sensors to the cc list)
On Thu, 03 May 2007, Thomas Renninger wrote:
I didn't have a closer look to the fan watchdog, but it looks like a
ThinkPad specific thing?
The fan watchdog could be generic and done for any driver that knows how to
set a fan to a default, safe state even
Hi,
I've got two questions regarding the implementation of the ACPI poweroff/sleep
code in drivers/acpi/sleep and drivers/acpi/hardware .
1) We don't seem to use the _TTS system-control method, although the ACPI
specification (ACPI 3.0b) says that this method should be used for intiating
and
Hi!
I've got two questions regarding the implementation of the ACPI poweroff/sleep
code in drivers/acpi/sleep and drivers/acpi/hardware .
1) We don't seem to use the _TTS system-control method, although the ACPI
specification (ACPI 3.0b) says that this method should be used for intiating
Hi!
Crazy idea... could we kill hibernate_ops-like struct, and just create
a device for ACPI, using its suspend()/resume()/whatever callbacks to
do the ACPI magic?
Okay. Since we're trying to separate the hibernation code from the
suspend code anyway, we can use the opportunity to introduce
Hi,
On Friday, 4 May 2007 00:27, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
I've got two questions regarding the implementation of the ACPI
poweroff/sleep
code in drivers/acpi/sleep and drivers/acpi/hardware .
1) We don't seem to use the _TTS system-control method, although the ACPI
specification
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-acpi-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rafael J. Wysocki
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 1:02 PM
To: ACPI Devel Maling List
Cc: pm list; Pavel Machek
Subject: Why don't we use _TTS method?
Hi,
I've got two questions
On Friday, 4 May 2007 00:57, Moore, Robert wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-acpi-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rafael J. Wysocki
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 1:02 PM
To: ACPI Devel Maling List
Cc: pm list; Pavel Machek
Subject: Why don't we
On 5/3/07, Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday, 3 May 2007 15:45, Guilherme Salgado wrote:
On 5/2/07, Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 2 May 2007 19:28, Guilherme Salgado wrote:
On 4/25/07, Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
Rafael,
code in prepare() and enter() is split as code with interrupts on and
code with interrupts off.
thus it doesn't quite follow a spec in regards of driver suspend.
Basically we need to either split it to smaller pieces or have hooks
to control interrupts/driver suspend from this code.
24 matches
Mail list logo
