From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nate Lawson Subject: Re: ACPI failures on non-Intel hardware Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 15:32:37 -0800 Message-ID: <41BB8395.1080200@root.org> References: <1102805280.5984.30.camel@tyrosine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1102805280.5984.30.camel@tyrosine> Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: Matthew Garrett Cc: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Matthew Garrett wrote: > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3691 describes a fairly > serious ACPI failure. Attempting to wake up from S3 suspend seems to > result in the system rebooting without any wakeup code being run. I've > seen this behaviour on two machines, and had it described to me on a > third. Interestingly, all the machines in question were non-Intel > hardware - one is a VIA C3, and the other two are Athlon XPs (not > Athlon64s). On the test machine I have here, FreeBSD behaves identically > to Linux (seemingly successful suspend, reboot on wake) and Windows > suspends and resumes correctly. > > The fact that I've only seen this on systems that didn't have Intel > motherboard chipsets makes me wonder whether there's something going > wrong during the suspend code that happens to work by chance on Intel > (and a few other) chipsets, or alternatively whether these chipsets > manage to fall outside the specs slightly. Any ideas? Very interesting! (Thanks for testing FreeBSD also.) I hadn't noticed the common thread in S3 error complaints except that the three classes are 1. goes to sleep and immediately wakes, 2. resets while going to sleep or waking up, and 3. goes to sleep and never wakes. One thing you should try is disabling various methods (like _SST) and see what happens. I think _BFS should be run before _SST since the 7.3.5 says no other method should be run before _BFS. Also, enabling BM arb after sleep may affect things. I'll test suspend/resume on my new EPIA-M at some point soon. -- Nate ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/