From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 29 13:51:09 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69484312; Thu, 29 May 2014 13:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42C6C2BD0; Thu, 29 May 2014 13:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D8C9B9CE; Thu, 29 May 2014 09:51:08 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: sbruno@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Investigating failed suspend/resume T61 Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 09:30:00 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.4-CBSD-20140415; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; ) References: <1400861698.1126.0.camel@bruno> <538666AE.4030501@FreeBSD.org> <1401369401.1100.1.camel@bruno> In-Reply-To: <1401369401.1100.1.camel@bruno> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201405290930.00425.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Thu, 29 May 2014 09:51:08 -0400 (EDT) Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 13:51:09 -0000 On Thursday, May 29, 2014 9:16:41 am Sean Bruno wrote: > On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 18:43 -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 2014-05-28 17:29:35 -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > > Err, I think it enables GPE1 as otherwise ACPICA assumes GPE1 has a > > > length of zero (and is thus invalid)? > > > > BTW, ACPI 5.0a (page 121) says: > > > > "This is an optional field; if this register block is not supported, > > this field contains zero." > > > > Therefore, we must assume X_GPE1_BLK it is NOT supported. > > > > Jung-uk Kim > > So, reverting John's changes and applying yours seems to do new things > while not quieting the old error messages. Perhaps this is significant? > > real memory = 2147483648 (2048 MB) > avail memory = 2007089152 (1914 MB) > Event timer "LAPIC" quality 400 > ACPI APIC Table: > FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs > FreeBSD/SMP: 1 package(s) x 2 core(s) > cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 > cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 > ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X length mismatch in FADT/Gpe1Block: 0/32 > (20130823/tbfadt-601) > ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): Optional FADT field Gpe1Block has zero address > or length: 0x000000000000102C/0x0 (20130823/tbfadt-630) > ioapic0: Changing APIC ID to 1 > ioapic0 irqs 0-23 on motherboard > random: initialized > kbd1 at kbdmux0 > acpi0: on motherboard > CPU0: local APIC error 0x40 > ACPI Error: GPE0 block (GPE 0 to 31) overlaps the GPE1 block (GPE 0 to > 15) - Ignoring GPE1 (20130823/evgpeinit-178) Actually, I think all these patches are changing nothing, and this actually points out that I misread your FADT at the first. GPE1 should actually be ignored since it does in fact overlap. Can you just try reverting all your changes and seeing if suspend/resume works? -- John Baldwin