From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Brownell Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.21-rc5-git] make /proc/acpi/wakeup more useful Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 03:35:35 -0700 Message-ID: <200704050335.36141.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <200704031741.42273.david-b@pacbell.net> <20070405092638.GA30208@srcf.ucam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp106.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.198.205]:37180 "HELO smtp106.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S966071AbXDEKfi (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Apr 2007 06:35:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070405092638.GA30208@srcf.ucam.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Linux Kernel list , Linux ACPI list , Andrew Morton On Thursday 05 April 2007 2:26 am, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 05:41:42PM -0700, David Brownell wrote: > > This updates /proc/acpi/wakeup to be more informative, primarily by showing > > the sysfs node associated with each wakeup-enabled device. Example: > > This looks good. Also "good at exposing some puzzling info" ... ;) > > S139 S4 disabled > > Any idea what this one is? There's the potential for all sorts of weird > platform devices to expose wakeup capabilities. My guess is Firewire (IEEE 1394); "F193" on a different system (different chip vendor) *is* Firewire. This BIOS seems to have wrongly copied ACPI tables from a similar system with a fancier southbridge from the same chip vendor. (ISTR the vendor's reference design used the fancier chip.) > > Eventually this file should be removed, but until then it's almost the only > > way we have to tell how the relevant ACPI tables are broken (and cope). In > > that example, two devices don't actually exist (USB3, S139), one can't issue > > wakeup events (PCI0), and two seem harmlessly (?) confused (MDM and AUD are > > the same PCI device, but it's the _modem_ that does wake-on-ring). > > Could the MDM entry be referring to the modem codec on the ac97 or > hda bus? That's my assumption; yes. Another system lists "AUD0" and "MODM", but shows neither as a wakeup device. As I said, "confused". - Dave