From owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org  Tue Jun 20 08:03:35 2000
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) id IAA42160;
	Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:03:35 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from rover.village.org (warner@rover.village.org [204.144.255.49])
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA42154;
	Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:03:30 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org)
Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6])
	by rover.village.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA36304;
	Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:03:12 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org)
Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.9.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id RAA63461; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:01:46 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <200006192301.RAA63461@harmony.village.org>
To: "Andrew Reilly" <areilly@nsw.bigpond.net.au>
Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>,
        Mitsuru IWASAKI <iwasaki@jp.freebsd.org>,
        bfischer@Techfak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE, acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org,
        dcs@newsguy.com, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG,
        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:55:31 +1000."
		<20000620085531.A38839@gurney.reilly.home> 
References: <20000620085531.A38839@gurney.reilly.home>  <200006191630.KAA60652@harmony.village.org> <45525.961432574@critter.freebsd.dk> 
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 17:01:46 -0600
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Precedence: list
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+000315
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 423
Subject: [acpi-jp 423] Re: ACPI project progress report 
Errors-To: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
X-Originator: imp@village.org

In message <20000620085531.A38839@gurney.reilly.home> "Andrew Reilly" writes:
: That sounds way too hard.  Why not restrict suspend activity to
: user-level processes and bring the kernel/drivers back up through
: a regular boot process?  At least that way the hardware and drivers
: will know what they are all up to, even if some of it has changed
: in the mean time.

Takes too long...  That's shutdown, not S4.

: > Obviously the video driver will need to send a signal or clue to the
: > Xserver saying "you own the device, you'd better do something"
: 
: Yeah.  The X server has far too much "driver" level code in it
: already, so probably needs to be tweaked to re-initialise itself
: properly.

Yes.  Likely.  But if we're going to support sleep modes, we'll need
to do this.

Warner
