Re: ACPI: _PTS ordering needs fixing for pre ACPI 3.0 systems (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM)

2007-12-25 Thread Carlos Corbacho
On Tuesday 25 December 2007 14:07:22 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > OK, sorry, the approach is generally reasonable, IMO, but it needs to be a > bit more fine grained. I know, hence this was marked as a hack and not signed off; it's just a demonstration of the general idea with code instead of

Re: ACPI: _PTS ordering needs fixing for pre ACPI 3.0 systems (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM)

2007-12-25 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, 25 of December 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, 25 of December 2007, Carlos Corbacho wrote: > > Adding Linux-ACPI to CC. > > > > On Tuesday 25 December 2007 00:03:25 Carlos Corbacho wrote: > > > According to the earlier versions of the ACPI spec, Linux is doing the > > >

Re: ACPI: _PTS ordering needs fixing for pre ACPI 3.0 systems (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM)

2007-12-25 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, 25 of December 2007, Carlos Corbacho wrote: > Adding Linux-ACPI to CC. > > On Tuesday 25 December 2007 00:03:25 Carlos Corbacho wrote: > > According to the earlier versions of the ACPI spec, Linux is doing the > > wrong thing - we should call _PTS() before we start powerding down

Re: ACPI: _PTS ordering needs fixing for pre ACPI 3.0 systems (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM)

2007-12-25 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, 25 of December 2007, Carlos Corbacho wrote: Adding Linux-ACPI to CC. On Tuesday 25 December 2007 00:03:25 Carlos Corbacho wrote: According to the earlier versions of the ACPI spec, Linux is doing the wrong thing - we should call _PTS() before we start powerding down devices,

Re: ACPI: _PTS ordering needs fixing for pre ACPI 3.0 systems (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM)

2007-12-25 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Tuesday, 25 of December 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tuesday, 25 of December 2007, Carlos Corbacho wrote: Adding Linux-ACPI to CC. On Tuesday 25 December 2007 00:03:25 Carlos Corbacho wrote: According to the earlier versions of the ACPI spec, Linux is doing the wrong thing -

Re: ACPI: _PTS ordering needs fixing for pre ACPI 3.0 systems (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM)

2007-12-25 Thread Carlos Corbacho
On Tuesday 25 December 2007 14:07:22 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: OK, sorry, the approach is generally reasonable, IMO, but it needs to be a bit more fine grained. I know, hence this was marked as a hack and not signed off; it's just a demonstration of the general idea with code instead of words.

ACPI: _PTS ordering needs fixing for pre ACPI 3.0 systems (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM)

2007-12-24 Thread Carlos Corbacho
Adding Linux-ACPI to CC. On Tuesday 25 December 2007 00:03:25 Carlos Corbacho wrote: > According to the earlier versions of the ACPI spec, Linux is doing the > wrong thing - we should call _PTS() before we start powerding down devices, > or notifying device drivers to start suspending. > > So, my

ACPI: _PTS ordering needs fixing for pre ACPI 3.0 systems (was: Re: x86: Increase PCIBIOS_MIN_IO to 0x1500 to fix nForce 4 suspend-to-RAM)

2007-12-24 Thread Carlos Corbacho
Adding Linux-ACPI to CC. On Tuesday 25 December 2007 00:03:25 Carlos Corbacho wrote: According to the earlier versions of the ACPI spec, Linux is doing the wrong thing - we should call _PTS() before we start powerding down devices, or notifying device drivers to start suspending. So, my