From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [patch] Refresh lid state on resume Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:42:26 +0200 Message-ID: <200707311542.27571.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <1184670921.8890.2.camel@work> <1185872842.2652.11.camel@hughsie-laptop> <1185878536.18821.129.camel@queen.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1185878536.18821.129.camel@queen.suse.de> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Unsubscribe: To: trenn@suse.de Cc: Richard Hughes , Len Brown , Dmitry Torokhov , linux-acpi , linux-input , Kay Sievers List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, 31 July 2007 12:42, Thomas Renninger wrote: > On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 10:07 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 11:08 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Monday, 30 July 2007 17:33, Richard Hughes wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 17:21 +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 12:15 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: > > > > > > On resume we need to refresh the lid status as we will not get = an event if > > > > > > the lid opening was what triggered the suspend. > > > > > > This manifests itself in users never getting a "lid open" event= when a > > > > > > suspend happens because of lid close on hardware that supports = wake on > > > > > > lid open. This makes userspace gets very confused indeed. > > > > > > Patch inline (and also attached) forces a check of the lid stat= us in the > > > > > > resume handler. > > > > > Is this a general problem on all machines? > > > >=20 > > > > I've only seen myself it on new ThinkPads such as the T61 and X60, > > > > although I've been getting a few bug reports about other IBM laptop= s. > > > >=20 > > > > > Or does this only happen if "shutdown" suspend mode is used? > > > >=20 > > > > No, I don't believe so. > > > >=20 > > > > > I could imagine a lot machines let it up to OS to check for LID s= tate > > > > > change, then this one should be added. > > > >=20 > > > > I guess it's up to the BIOS, and I don't think this refresh hurts a= ny > > > > machines that implement a notify on resume, and fixes a fair few > > > > machines that don't. > > >=20 > > > AFAICS, the notify doesn't seem to work very well on some machines. > >=20 > > Agree. > >=20 > > > Are there any downsides of the $subject patch? > >=20 > > Not that I've found. I've been testing it on ~6 IBM and non-IBM machines > > with no bad effects so far. >=20 > I just checked a X60 DSDT (couldn't check the SSDTs, but I doubt there > is anything related): > There are two Notify(\_SB.LID,0x80), both are in GPE handlers. > AFAIK there should be one in the _WAK function. Well, we only enable GPEs after calling _WAK, so this one won't trigger. Perhaps we should change the code ordering in acpi_leave_sleep_state() to enable GPEs before executing _WAK? > Maybe they try to raise the GPE after wakeup in _WAK by something like > this: > \VSLD (\_SB.LID._LID ()) > .... > Method (VSLD, 1, NotSerialized) > { > SMI (0x01, 0x07, Arg0, 0x00, 0x00) > } > :) >=20 >=20 > Related ACPI Spec parts: >=20 > 6.3 Device Insertion, Removal, and Status Objects: > The Notify command can also be used from the _WAK control method (for > more information about _WAK, see section 7.3.7 =E2=80=9C\_WAK (System Wak= e)=E2=80=9D) to > indicate device changes that may have occurred while the computer was > sleeping. For more information about the Notify command, > see section 5.6.3 =E2=80=9CDevice Object Notification.=E2=80=9D.=E2=80=9D >=20 > The X60 is definitely not doing this. >=20 > The transition from Working to Sleep state is described very detailed, > but I couldn't find (just overseen?) a detailed description about the > transition from Sleep State to working state. > In detail I searched for whether first the GPEs should get enabled and > then _WAK is called or the other way around (the latter is currently > implemented). > Maybe enabling GPEs before calling _WAK will also fix this Well, my thought above. :-) > (and is the way it should be done or at least the way M$ is doing it?). I don't know ... > Richard, could you give attached patch a try, pls. > Also check that platform suspend mode is used. AFAIK this isn't called > at all in suspend mode. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Thomas >=20 > ----------------------- >=20 > Enable GPEs before calling _WAK on resume >=20 > Signed-off-by: Thomas Renninger >=20 > --- > drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++-------------- > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >=20 > Index: linux-2.6.22.1/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > --- linux-2.6.22.1.orig/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c > +++ linux-2.6.22.1/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c > @@ -562,6 +562,23 @@ acpi_status acpi_leave_sleep_state(u8 sl > arg_list.pointer =3D &arg; > arg.type =3D ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER; > =20 > + /* > + * GPEs must be enabled before _WAK is called as GPEs > + * might get fired there > + * > + * Restore the GPEs: > + * 1) Disable/Clear all GPEs > + * 2) Enable all runtime GPEs > + */ > + status =3D acpi_hw_disable_all_gpes(); > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) { > + return_ACPI_STATUS(status); > + } > + status =3D acpi_hw_enable_all_runtime_gpes(); > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) { > + return_ACPI_STATUS(status); > + } > + I wouldn't move that before _BFS, just in case someone actually implements = it. Enabling GPEs just prior to calling _WAK should be safe, IMO. > /* Ignore any errors from these methods */ > =20 > arg.integer.value =3D ACPI_SST_WAKING; > @@ -582,22 +599,8 @@ acpi_status acpi_leave_sleep_state(u8 sl > } > /* TBD: _WAK "sometimes" returns stuff - do we want to look at it? */ > =20 > - /* > - * Restore the GPEs: > - * 1) Disable/Clear all GPEs > - * 2) Enable all runtime GPEs > - */ > - status =3D acpi_hw_disable_all_gpes(); > - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) { > - return_ACPI_STATUS(status); > - } > acpi_gbl_system_awake_and_running =3D TRUE; > =20 > - status =3D acpi_hw_enable_all_runtime_gpes(); > - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) { > - return_ACPI_STATUS(status); > - } > - > /* Enable power button */ > =20 > (void) Greetings, Rafael =2D-=20 "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth