On Wednesday, 29 August 2007 18:54, Moore, Robert wrote:

No, it's not safe to run the AML interpreter with interrupts disabled.

OK

I don't have any problem with introducing finer granularity enter/exit
sleep interfaces if they are required.

I would suggest that we rename things a bit however.

Currently:
acpi_enter_sleep_state_prep
acpi_enter_sleep_state_prep_late
acpi_enter_sleep_state

acpi_leave_sleep_state_prep
acpi_leave_sleep_state

I think we can truncate and clarify:

acpi_sleep_setup1
acpi_sleep_setup2
acpi_sleep

acpi_wake_setup1
acpi_wake

That's perfectly fine by me.  I'll update the 2/3 patch to use these names.

Also, I think we can remove acpi_enter_sleep_state_s4bios() entirely (in a
separate patch).

acpi_set_sleep_state_indicator:

I'm not sure if we have any external interfaces that simply execute a
control method, seems like overkill.

Please give me more information as to why _SSI needs to be moved (other
than executing it after _BFS)

The _SST after _BFS is okay, but the invocation of _SST in acpi_wake()
(currently acpi_leave_sleep_state) is problematic, since it causes the
indicator to be set to "working" during hibernation, before the image is
saved.  Thus, during hibernation _SST shouldn't be called from acpi_wake().

For this reason, I thought it would be a good idea to call _SST from a separate
routine that might be invoked by higher level functions as desired.

Greetings,
Rafael