Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:47:18 +0300
From:      Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>
To:        Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>
Cc:        freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: run resume code only for S1-S4 states
Message-ID:  <49EC60C6.7000702@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <49E9FFB0.6090707@root.org>
References:  <49DB639A.4090504@icyb.net.ua> <49DCF5C2.60805@root.org>	<49DDF906.8090400@icyb.net.ua> <49DF3CA4.1090309@freebsd.org>	<49E4B2A7.3020302@freebsd.org> <49E61986.7040709@root.org>	<49E8AED0.1090008@freebsd.org> <20090418125806.2a48b0a8@fabiankeil.de> <49E9FFB0.6090707@root.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 18/04/2009 19:28 Nate Lawson said the following:
> Fabian Keil wrote:
>> Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>>> An updated version of the patch, the only difference is: do-while(0) is gone,
>>> breaks are replaces with gotos, indentation is reduced.
>>>
>>> Per Nate's request I am calling for people with SMP systems to test if powering
>>> off via power button still works with this change. It's desirable to test power
>>> off at least two times to increase a chance of non-BSP CPU being used.
>> With an AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4600+ (2542.15-MHz K8-class CPU)
>> the first few shutdowns were successful, but on the fourth try pressing the
>> power button only lead to:
>>
>> Apr 18 12:52:42 kendra kernel: acpi: suspend request ignored (not ready yet)
>> Apr 18 12:52:42 kendra kernel: acpi: request to enter state S5 failed (err 6)
>> Apr 18 12:52:43 kendra kernel: acpi: suspend request ignored (not ready yet)
>> Apr 18 12:52:43 kendra kernel: acpi: request to enter state S5 failed (err 6)
>> Apr 18 12:52:43 kendra kernel: acpi: suspend request ignored (not ready yet)
>> Apr 18 12:52:43 kendra kernel: acpi: request to enter state S5 failed (err 6)
>> [...]
> 
> Yes, I think the case for S5 should probably come before
> acpi_sleep_disable().

Right now the patch tries to preserve the same behavior in this respect
as the current code has. I don't have a good understanding of
overlapping requests to enter different sleep states and potential bad
effects (e.g. S1 request while soft power off is already in progress).

But in this case I actually wonder what left ACPI driver is "sleep
disabled" state. Did the first soft poweroff attempt fail and caused
subsequent attempts to be disabled? Hmm, if so, then I wonder why it
could have failed.

-- 
Andriy Gapon



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49EC60C6.7000702>