2.6.0: APM suspend/resume problem on Acer TravelMate 210TEV

Hi,

I already had some discussion about that topic on linux-kernel, but it
seems that no one has any idea how to fix this or even how to track this
down (it could also be they all have me in their kill filter, but i don't
hope so... *please* give me a chance. thanks.).

I'll try to summarize the current situation:

My laptop (Acer TravelMate 210TEV, Celeron 700) did suspend properly on
2.6.0-test[123]. Since -test4 (up to the final version and -mm2) it does
not work any more.

When I try to suspend (using apm -s, since I set the kernel to ignore user
suspend), the computer suspends properly now, but it does not resume
afterwards properly. It looks as if it had resumed, i see the command
prompt (or i see the first lines of output of a command i add by "apm -s;
somecommand"), then it hangs.

I tried to track it down to a driver, but did not manage it.

i got that if I enable local APIC it gets worse (does not even suspend) or
when I add the yenta driver, it does not get that far in resuming: it dies
somewhere inside of the device_resume(3) call of arch/i386/kernel/apm.c (i
added "printk"s into that file, but the problems occur as well when i use a
"vanilla" 2.6.0). But as i can live well without apic and yenta, these are
not my problems.

But trying to make the kernel smaller did not help at all. I ended up with
2 really "minimalistic" kernels, the difference is that one has IDE drivers

[PATCH] [APM] Is this the correct way to fix suspend bug introduced in 2.6.0-test4?

Hi,

the patch below (against 2.6.1-mm5) fixes my APM problems (my laptop, Acer
TravelMate 210TEV (Celeron 700, 128 MB RAM), hangs after resuming from APM
since 2.6.0-test4).

I found the "fix" by trying to "reversely" backport the changes from
patch-2.6.0-test4.bz2 into 2.6.1-mm5 (the old device_suspend code calls
sysdev_suspend, the new one does not; so what do I lose if I call
sysdev_suspend myself?). This trial-and-error-approach finally led into the
patch below (which works great for me).

Most likely this is not the cleanest way to do this; but since I don't even
know what this sysdev_suspend does (except that it does something that
seems to be vital for making my laptop resume...), i don't know how to make
it better...

If you have any suggestions, tell me (or change it yourself and submit it),
if you think that's okay like that, please submit that to the guy who is
responsible for 2.6 (is it Linus or Andrew? did not follow lkml recently).

TIA,

Michael

PS: if possible, please CC me in yout replies

====== apm-bug-introduced-in-test4.patch ======
--- linux-2.6.1-mm5/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c.old	Sun Jan 25 14:48:27 2004
+++ linux-2.6.1-mm5/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c	Sun Jan 25 16:10:43 2004

PROBLEM: uhci-hcd under 2.6* kernel hangs the system

when I "modprobe uhci-hcd" the systems hangs after about a minute!
tried this under 2.6.0, 2.6.1-rc1 and 2.6.1
only my good old 2.4.19 works with usb-uhci

Hardware:
Samsung Q10 notebook
00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82801CA/CAM USB (Hub #1) (rev 02)
00:1d.1 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82801CA/CAM USB (Hub #2) (rev 02)
00:1d.2 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82801CA/CAM USB (Hub #3) (rev 02) 

the other details as attachement !

anyone mentioned this before ??

mike
--

-- 
a woman can fake an orgasm,
but it takes a man
to fake an entire relationship

Re: [PATCH] [APM] Is this the correct way to fix suspend bug introduced in 2.6.0-test4?

Hi!
> 
> the patch below (against 2.6.1-mm5) fixes my APM problems (my laptop, Acer
> TravelMate 210TEV (Celeron 700, 128 MB RAM), hangs after resuming from APM
> since 2.6.0-test4).
> 
> I found the "fix" by trying to "reversely" backport the changes from
> patch-2.6.0-test4.bz2 into 2.6.1-mm5 (the old device_suspend code calls
> sysdev_suspend, the new one does not; so what do I lose if I call
> sysdev_suspend myself?). This trial-and-error-approach finally led into the
> patch below (which works great for me).
> 
> Most likely this is not the cleanest way to do this; but since I don't even
> know what this sysdev_suspend does (except that it does something that
> seems to be vital for making my laptop resume...), i don't know how to make
> it better...
> 
> If you have any suggestions, tell me (or change it yourself and submit it),
> if you think that's okay like that, please submit that to the guy who is
> responsible for 2.6 (is it Linus or Andrew? did not follow lkml
> recently).

Andrew.

I think you should use device_power_down() and device_power_up(),
instead. Check it, but it looks to me like that's better way.
								Pavel
--

-- 
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]

Re: [PATCH] [APM] Is this the correct way to fix suspend bug introduced in 2.6.0-test4?

Pavel Machek schrieb:
> 
> Hi!
> >
> > the patch below (against 2.6.1-mm5) fixes my APM problems (my laptop, Acer
> > TravelMate 210TEV (Celeron 700, 128 MB RAM), hangs after resuming from APM
> > since 2.6.0-test4).
> >
> > If you have any suggestions, tell me 

> I think you should use device_power_down() and device_power_up(),
> instead. Check it, but it looks to me like that's better way.

Works for me as well (Patch attached).

> > if you think that's okay like that, please submit that to the guy who is
> > responsible for 2.6 (is it Linus or Andrew? did not follow lkml
> > recently).
> 
> Andrew.

Thanks. BTW: I did not get any response from Stephen Rothwell (the guy
who is listed as maintainer for APM in the MAINTAINERS file). How long
should I wait for a response? Or should I simply submit the patch to
Andrew?

Michael

--- linux-2.6.2-rc2-mm1/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c.old	Thu Jan 29 16:22:03 2004
+++ linux-2.6.2-rc2-mm1/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c	Thu Jan 29 16:22:07 2004

Re: [PATCH] [APM] Is this the correct way to fix suspend bug introduced in 2.6.0-test4?

Hi!

> > > if you think that's okay like that, please submit that to the guy who is
> > > responsible for 2.6 (is it Linus or Andrew? did not follow lkml
> > > recently).
> > 
> > Andrew.
> 
> Thanks. BTW: I did not get any response from Stephen Rothwell (the guy
> who is listed as maintainer for APM in the MAINTAINERS file). How long
> should I wait for a response? Or should I simply submit the patch to
> Andrew?

I'd submit patch to andrew, Cc: stephen. -mm series should get enough
testing, and this is not to big patch.

[The patch looks good to me, btw.]
									Pavel

> Michael
> --- linux-2.6.2-rc2-mm1/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c.old	Thu Jan 29 16:22:03 2004
> +++ linux-2.6.2-rc2-mm1/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c	Thu Jan 29 16:22:07 2004
>  <at>  <at>  -1201,6 +1201,7  <at>  <at>  static int suspend(int vetoable)
>  	}
>  
>  	device_suspend(3);
> +	device_power_down(3);
>  
>  	/* serialize with the timer interrupt */
>  	write_seqlock_irq(&xtime_lock);

Re: [PATCH] [APM] Is this the correct way to fix suspend bug introduced in 2.6.0-test4?

I wrote:

> Thanks. BTW: I did not get any response from Stephen Rothwell (the guy
> who is listed as maintainer for APM in the MAINTAINERS file). How long
> should I wait for a response? Or should I simply submit the patch to
> Andrew?

JFTR: Now this address bounced:

550_5.1.1_≤fr <at> canb.auug.org.au>..._User_unknown/Giving_up_on_203.10.76.34./

Michael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-laptop" in
the body of a message to majordomo <at> vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] [APM] Is this the correct way to fix suspend bug introduced in 2.6.0-test4?

Michael Schierl wrote:

> the patch below (against 2.6.1-mm5) fixes my APM problems 

And mine as well (Dell Inspiron 5000 laptop).

Axel

kernel 2.6 on compaq nx9010

Hi,
I'm just trying to compile and optimize the kernel 2.6 for my compaq nx9010, 
so I'd like to know if someone has already done it, or is doing, thus he can 
give me some suggestions.

Thanks,
Luca

--

-- 
Luca Ferrari,
fluca1978 <at> virgilio.it

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-laptop" in
the body of a message to majordomo <at> vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html