在 2013-04-09二的 13:06 +0200，Paolo Bonzini写道： > Il 09/04/2013 10:26, li guang ha scritto: > > > qemu_system_suspend_request, qemu_register_suspend_notifier > > > for S0->S3 > > > > > > qemu_system_wakeup_request, qemu_register_wakeup_notifier > > > for S3->S0 > > > > > > qemu_system_powerdown_request, qemu_register_powerdown_notifier > > > for Sx->S5 > > > > > > and the reset mechanism for S5->S0. > > > > Yep, I'm trying to supersede these functions > > by my power chip emulation. > > Then I explained in my other message why this is wrong. The API may > well be "bad" (if so, please explain why), but at least it is the right > tool to model this. QEMU models abstract concepts (memory, timers, > powerdown) with APIs, not with devices. >
It's probably not 'bad', just only not native, because real hardware does not do thing that way, and also, this power chip is not purely conceptual, it just try to integrate jobs of power control from different platform. of course, I can model this power chip as real hardware which exists in specific platform. can we just feel happy with current implementation and don't want to try other things? :-) or do you consider this totally wrong for direction?
