Re: Regression: ACPI AC driver doesn't work on Toshiba Portege R500 (bisected)

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Monday, 24 of November 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, 24 of November 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Sunday, 23 of November 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > With current mainline (2.6.28-rc6-git1 as of today) on Toshiba Portege R500 the
> > > status of the AC adapter is not updated when the adapter is unplugged and
> > > plugged in.  Evidently, /sys/class/power_supply/ADP1/online always contains the
> > > same value.  Interestingly enough, though, if the box is suspended to RAM and
> > > resumed, the status of the AC adapter is correctly updated, but the value read
> > > at that time remains in /sys/class/power_supply/ADP1/online until the next
> > > suspend/resume cycle regardless of what's going on with the AC adapter.
> > > 
> > > 2.6.27.7 works correctly on this box so the recent EC patches don't seem to
> > > cause this regression to happen.
> > > 
> > > Any other ideas?
> > 
> > The problem was introduced by the following commit:
> > 
> > commit faee816b1502385dc9bc5abf2960d1cc645844d1
> > Author: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> > Date:   Fri Sep 12 11:12:25 2008 +0800
> > 
> >     ACPI: don't enable control method power button as wakeup device when Fixed Power button is used
> > 
> >     don't enable control method power button as wakeup device
> >     when Fixed Power button is used.
> > 
> >     http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10503
> > 
> >     Tested-by: walken@zoy.org <walken@zoy.org>
> >     Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> >     Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> > 
> > Reverting this commit on top of the current mainline makes the kernel behave
> > correctly again.
> 
> Alas, after reverting the patch the box hangs on resume from suspend to RAM
> when it is woken up by opening the lid.

This was actually wrong.  There is a separate resume regression on this box,
caused most probably by DRM, so in fact the reverting of the commit above is
fine.

Thanks,
Rafael