> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ cat /proc/acpi/wakeup
> Device S-state Status Sysfs node PCI ID
> SLPB S4*enabled
> P32 S4 disabled pci::00:1e.0 0x244e
> UAR1 S4 disabled pnp:00:090x
This should tell you how bad is placing PCI ID
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ cat /proc/acpi/wakeup
Device S-state Status Sysfs node PCI ID
SLPB S4*enabled
P32 S4 disabled pci::00:1e.0 0x244e
UAR1 S4 disabled pnp:00:090x
This should tell you how bad is placing PCI ID into
> > I think that it would be much much better to place wake-up attributes under
> > corresponding PCI and PNP devices.
> > Probably it is even better to link this code to PCI code, so PCI drivers
> > will be aware of ACPI.
> I like this idea, maxim. :)
> And that's what we actually did about half
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 09:43 +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> On Thursday, 10 January 2008 00:21:46 Yi Yang wrote:
> > Subject: ACPI: convert procfs to sysfs for /proc/acpi/wakeup
> > From: Yi Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > /proc/acpi/wakeup is deprecated but it has to exist because
> > we haven't
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 09:43 +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
On Thursday, 10 January 2008 00:21:46 Yi Yang wrote:
Subject: ACPI: convert procfs to sysfs for /proc/acpi/wakeup
From: Yi Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/proc/acpi/wakeup is deprecated but it has to exist because
we haven't a sysfs
I think that it would be much much better to place wake-up attributes under
corresponding PCI and PNP devices.
Probably it is even better to link this code to PCI code, so PCI drivers
will be aware of ACPI.
I like this idea, maxim. :)
And that's what we actually did about half a year
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 07:59:36AM +0800, Yi Yang wrote:
> Maybe this is a good idea, but i don't know the relationships between
> acpi devices, devices, pci devices and pnp devices. If we can merge all
> these things together, that will be a great job.
Let's not merge this yet, then, otherwise
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 09:43 +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> On Thursday, 10 January 2008 00:21:46 Yi Yang wrote:
> > Subject: ACPI: convert procfs to sysfs for /proc/acpi/wakeup
> > From: Yi Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > /proc/acpi/wakeup is deprecated but it has to exist because
> > we haven't
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 09:43 +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
On Thursday, 10 January 2008 00:21:46 Yi Yang wrote:
Subject: ACPI: convert procfs to sysfs for /proc/acpi/wakeup
From: Yi Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/proc/acpi/wakeup is deprecated but it has to exist because
we haven't a sysfs
On Thu, Jan 10, 2008 at 07:59:36AM +0800, Yi Yang wrote:
Maybe this is a good idea, but i don't know the relationships between
acpi devices, devices, pci devices and pnp devices. If we can merge all
these things together, that will be a great job.
Let's not merge this yet, then, otherwise
On Thursday, 10 January 2008 00:21:46 Yi Yang wrote:
> Subject: ACPI: convert procfs to sysfs for /proc/acpi/wakeup
> From: Yi Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> /proc/acpi/wakeup is deprecated but it has to exist because
> we haven't a sysfs interface to replace it yet, this patch
> converts
On Thursday, 10 January 2008 00:21:46 Yi Yang wrote:
Subject: ACPI: convert procfs to sysfs for /proc/acpi/wakeup
From: Yi Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/proc/acpi/wakeup is deprecated but it has to exist because
we haven't a sysfs interface to replace it yet, this patch
converts /proc/acpi/wakeup
12 matches
Mail list logo
