From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 28 21:05:49 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46DD16A4BF for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 21:05:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rootlabs.com (root.org [67.118.192.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 66E9C43FEA for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 21:05:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nate@rootlabs.com) Received: (qmail 41717 invoked by uid 1000); 29 Aug 2003 04:05:51 -0000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 21:05:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Nate Lawson To: current@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20030829040223.6909616A538@hub.freebsd.org> Message-ID: <20030828210355.F41704@root.org> References: <20030829040223.6909616A538@hub.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org Subject: Re: changed AcpiEnterSleepStateS4Bios X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 04:05:50 -0000 On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Nate Lawson wrote: > Modified files: > sys/conf files > sys/modules/acpi Makefile > sys/dev/acpica acpi.c > sys/i386/acpica acpi_wakeup.c > Removed files: > sys/dev/acpica acpica_support.c acpica_support.h > Log: > Use the ACPICA AcpiEnterSleepStateS4bios instead of rolling our own. This > change also disables interrupts around non-S4 suspends whereas before we > did not do this. Our version of AcpiEnterSleepStateS4bios was almost > identical to the ACPICA version. > > Revision Changes Path > 1.817 +0 -1 src/sys/conf/files > 1.97 +0 -1 src/sys/dev/acpica/acpi.c > 1.8 +0 -107 src/sys/dev/acpica/acpica_support.c (dead) > 1.2 +0 -38 src/sys/dev/acpica/acpica_support.h (dead) > 1.25 +4 -3 src/sys/i386/acpica/acpi_wakeup.c > 1.31 +2 -3 src/sys/modules/acpi/Makefile If you were using S4BIOS before, please let me know how this affects things. It should be a no-op as the functions were nearly the same. Also if S3 works for you, please test to be sure this doesn't break anything. It works fine on my IBM T23. -Nate