Re: broken suspend in .2.6.25-rc3 on T61p (was Re: new regression in 2.6.25-rc3: no keyboard/lid acpi events on thinkpad T61p)

[Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 10:56:41PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:

 > Seems like pm-utils is just a thin wrapper around s2ram, at least in
 > version debian ships. It does not seem to have its own whitelist.

The actual whitelists still live in hal (or specifically hal-data),
rather than pm-utils.  /usr/share/hal/fdi/information/10freedesktop/20-video-quirk-pm-*
for example.  This gets passed down to pm-utils by hal.

 > /usr/lib/pm-utils/functions
 > 
 > ... 
 > 
 >         if [ -x /usr/sbin/s2ram ]; then
 >                 if [ -n "$S2RAM_OPTS" ]; then
 >                         # Trust HAL or the user to pass the correct
 > options
 >                         /usr/sbin/s2ram $S2RAM_OPTS
 >                 elif /usr/sbin/s2ram --test > /dev/null ; then
 >                         # Trust s2ram's internal whitelist
 >                         /usr/sbin/s2ram
 >                 else
 >                         # Unknown machine
 >                         echo "This machine is unkown, please try to
 > find out how to suspend this machine. See s2ram(8)."
 >                 fi
 >         else
 >                 echo -n "mem" > /sys/power/state
 >         fi

Seems to be a debian specific change, the variant in Fedora, nor upstream
pm-utils doesn't have any of that.  Possibly because it's a dumb idea
to have two separate sources of the same information.

 > ...so it is ready to use s2ram, but will fall back to
 > echo. Unfortunately, that will mean no video resume on _many_
 > machines.
 > 
 > To give some numbers: according to s2ram whitelist, we can restore
 > video on 410 machines. On 74 of them, s2ram is not needed. So
 > approximately 80% of machines need s2ram (at least in configuration
 > without X running)....
 > 
 > Pretty please, can we get s2ram for Fedora, so that video is restored
 > there?
 
I'm not the gatekeeper of what goes into Fedora userspace, but I'm pretty
certain the path forward has already been decided.  Running a modern
Fedora desktop installation without hal just isn't feasible.

	Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk