From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu May 22 04:01:19 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF2BD106567E
	for <freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org>; Thu, 22 May 2008 04:01:19 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from takawata@init-main.com)
Received: from sana.init-main.com (unknown [IPv6:2001:240:28::1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DA328FC0C
	for <freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org>; Thu, 22 May 2008 04:01:19 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from takawata@init-main.com)
Received: from ns.init-main.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sana.init-main.com (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m4M3dF2q033762;
	Thu, 22 May 2008 12:39:17 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from takawata@ns.init-main.com)
Message-Id: <200805220339.m4M3dF2q033762@sana.init-main.com>
To: vova@fbsd.ru
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 21 May 2008 21:23:25 +0400."
	<1211390605.1794.15.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 12:39:15 +0900
From: Takanori Watanabe <takawata@init-main.com>
Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: SMP suspend/resume.
X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: ACPI and power management development <freebsd-acpi.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-acpi>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 04:01:19 -0000


>I've tried to build patch with recent CURRENT and get 
>SMP redefined for acpi.c and acpi_wakeup.c
>
>Was it expected ? 

Expected. I tested with kernel module, so I define directly for now.
I want to make it work without SMP defined by cleaning up and moving 
the smp dependent code to mp_machdep.c .

>On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 18:21 +0400, Vladimir Grebenschikov wrote:
>> On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 20:25 +0900, takawata@init-main.com wrote:
>> > Hi, I managed to make suspend and resume work on SMP system.
>> > The patch following is a bit crude patch, but it begin=20
>> > to work on my ThinkPad X61 (core2duo system).
>>=20
>> Tried patch on T60, from text console,=20
>> on acpiconf -s3
>> it shows multiple times "forward_wakeup: Idle processor not found" on
>> console and then friezed hard (even DDB does not works). But nothing was
>> suspended actually ( before system goes to sleep but did not awakes)
>>=20
>> Any hints ?
>
>In some conditions (single-user, no additional drivers) it shows:
>
>forward_wakeup: Idle processor not found
>PREP_WALK
>LEAVE_SLEEP_STATE
>DEVICE_RESUME
>=EF=BB=BFforward_wakeup: Idle processor not found
>ENABLE_FIXED_EVENT
>=EF=BB=BFforward_wakeup: Idle processor not found
>=EF=BB=BFforward_wakeup: Idle processor not found
>=EF=BB=BFforward_wakeup: Idle processor not found
>=EF=BB=BFforward_wakeup: Idle processor not found
>=EF=BB=BFforward_wakeup: Idle processor not found
>... etc ...
>
>sometimes it shows just many
>=EF=BB=BFforward_wakeup: Idle processor not found
>
>
>and in any case locks hard and did not enter S3
>
>But RELENG_7 (without patch) normally enters to S3, but failed to wake.

I tested it on sched_ule. So I know littele about sched_4bsd.
The message may caused on forward_wakeup on sched_4bsd, so
how about kern.sched.ipiwakeup.forward_wakeup set to 0.