From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Sigler Subject: Re: halt does not shut the system down Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:59:13 +0200 Message-ID: <4715DCF1.30507@free.fr> References: <470A58AF.9080402@free.fr> <470C9731.6030200@free.fr> <470F4535.3050004@free.fr> <470F4F58.4080900@gmail.com> <470F7264.8070205@free.fr> <471342C8.2030305@free.fr> <4714979C.5010103@free.fr> <4714B7D7.7090005@free.fr> <4714EF81.2070405@gmail.com> <4715C337.6050705@free.fr> <4715C39E.7070603@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp4-g19.free.fr ([212.27.42.30]:38610 "EHLO smtp4-g19.free.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757021AbXJQJ7P (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:59:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4715C39E.7070603@gmail.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Alexey Starikovskiy , len.brown@intel.com Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robert.moore@intel.com Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: > John Sigler wrote: > >> Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: >> >>> John Sigler wrote: >>> >>>> +===================================+ >>>> | Soft-Off by PWR-BTTN | >>>> |-----------------------------------| >>>> | Instant-Off ..... [v] | >>>> | Delay 4 Sec. ..... [ ] | >>>> | | >>>> |-----------------------------------| >>>> | ^V:Move ENTER:Accept ESC:Abort | >>>> +===================================+ >>>> >>>> 'Instant-Off' is the appropriate setting, right? >>> >>> Actually, default should be 4 sec delay. OS should have a chance to >>> shut down the system... >> >> I don't see why this setting would have an impact on the outcome >> of the 'halt' and 'poweroff' commands. >> > Well, it is not possible to tell, what BIOS writer have connected to this flag... (It sucks to be stuck with a closed proprietary BIOS.) I tested the other setting, and it didn't change anything. The system remains powered on after executing poweroff. Len: the system is 100% Intel (Intel CPU, Intel north bridge, Intel south bridge, Intel integrated network controllers). Have Intel engineers run into the same problem on a similar platform? http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9148 Regards.