* [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN @ 2010-04-19 21:13 Matthew Garrett 2010-04-20 15:00 ` Alex Chiang 2010-04-28 18:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Matthew Garrett @ 2010-04-19 21:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel; +Cc: linux-acpi, lenb, Matthew Garrett The ACPI spec tells us that the ACPI SCI_EN bit is under hardware control and shouldn't be touched by the OS. It seems that the Leading Other OS ignores this and some machines expect this behaviour. We have a blacklist for these, but given that we're able to detect the failure case and the alternative to breaking the spec is letting the machine crash and burn, let's try falling back when we know the alternative is a mostly-dead machine. Signed-off-by: Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com> --- drivers/acpi/sleep.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c index f74834a..79df8d4 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c @@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ static int acpi_suspend_begin(suspend_state_t pm_state) static int acpi_suspend_enter(suspend_state_t pm_state) { acpi_status status = AE_OK; + acpi_status enable_status = AE_OK; unsigned long flags = 0; u32 acpi_state = acpi_target_sleep_state; @@ -254,10 +255,19 @@ static int acpi_suspend_enter(suspend_state_t pm_state) } /* If ACPI is not enabled by the BIOS, we need to enable it here. */ - if (set_sci_en_on_resume) + if (!set_sci_en_on_resume) + enable_status = acpi_enable(); + + if (set_sci_en_on_resume || enable_status == AE_NO_HARDWARE_RESPONSE) + /* If we're still in legacy mode then we have a problem. The + * spec tells us that this bit is under hardware control, but + * there's no plausible way that the OS can transition back to + * legacy mode so our choices here are to either ignore the + * spec or crash and burn horribly. The latter doesn't seem + * like it's ever going to be the preferable choice, so let's + * live dangerously. + */ acpi_write_bit_register(ACPI_BITREG_SCI_ENABLE, 1); - else - acpi_enable(); /* Reprogram control registers and execute _BFS */ acpi_leave_sleep_state_prep(acpi_state); -- 1.7.0.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN 2010-04-19 21:13 [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN Matthew Garrett @ 2010-04-20 15:00 ` Alex Chiang 2010-04-20 17:31 ` Rezwanul_Kabir 2010-04-28 18:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Alex Chiang @ 2010-04-20 15:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthew Garrett; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-acpi, lenb * Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>: > The ACPI spec tells us that the ACPI SCI_EN bit is under hardware control > and shouldn't be touched by the OS. It seems that the Leading Other OS > ignores this and some machines expect this behaviour. We have a blacklist > for these, but given that we're able to detect the failure case and the > alternative to breaking the spec is letting the machine crash and burn, > let's try falling back when we know the alternative is a mostly-dead > machine. Yes, we got a hint from a Lenovo BIOS developer: A SCI_EN bit had not been set at S3 resume post. It should be set as ACPI defines. It seems that Windows OS sets SCI_EN bit by itself after S3 resume.... So I believe that Matthew's approach is reasonably safe and correct. Acked-by: Alex Chiang <achiang@canonical.com> /ac ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN 2010-04-20 15:00 ` Alex Chiang @ 2010-04-20 17:31 ` Rezwanul_Kabir 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Rezwanul_Kabir @ 2010-04-20 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: achiang, mjg; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-acpi, lenb Agree with getting Matthew's patch to fall back on force setting SCI_EN bit. I have discovered this issue recently with New Gen Dell systems where the systems were suspending right the first time around and then resorted to rebooting ( instead of resuming ) the second time. Also, the system would come with SCI interrupt disabled the first time around. I worked with the BIOS teams to get this fixed in the latest BIOS revs but just as Alex pointed out Matthew's approach seems to be the default bahaviour in the "Other OS". The problem may be more widespread than the limited set of blacklisted platforms.. Thanks.. --rez Rezwanul Kabir Dell Inc. 512-725-0766 >-----Original Message----- >From: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org >[mailto:linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Alex Chiang >Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 10:00 AM >To: Matthew Garrett >Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org; >lenb@kernel.org >Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN > >* Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>: >> The ACPI spec tells us that the ACPI SCI_EN bit is under hardware >> control and shouldn't be touched by the OS. It seems that >the Leading >> Other OS ignores this and some machines expect this >behaviour. We have >> a blacklist for these, but given that we're able to detect >the failure >> case and the alternative to breaking the spec is letting the machine >> crash and burn, let's try falling back when we know the >alternative is >> a mostly-dead machine. > >Yes, we got a hint from a Lenovo BIOS developer: > > A SCI_EN bit had not been set at S3 resume post. It > should be set as ACPI defines. It seems that Windows OS > sets SCI_EN bit by itself after S3 resume.... > >So I believe that Matthew's approach is reasonably safe and correct. > >Acked-by: Alex Chiang <achiang@canonical.com> > >/ac >-- >To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe >linux-acpi" in the body of a message to >majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at >http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN 2010-04-19 21:13 [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN Matthew Garrett 2010-04-20 15:00 ` Alex Chiang @ 2010-04-28 18:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2010-04-29 0:22 ` Len Brown 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2010-04-28 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthew Garrett, lenb; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-acpi, pm list, Len Brown On Monday 19 April 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote: > The ACPI spec tells us that the ACPI SCI_EN bit is under hardware control > and shouldn't be touched by the OS. It seems that the Leading Other OS > ignores this and some machines expect this behaviour. We have a blacklist > for these, but given that we're able to detect the failure case and the > alternative to breaking the spec is letting the machine crash and burn, > let's try falling back when we know the alternative is a mostly-dead > machine. > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com> I guess we can try that, but I'd prefer it if that went into .35. It _should_ be safe, but ... Anyway, Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> > --- > drivers/acpi/sleep.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- > 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c > index f74834a..79df8d4 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c > @@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ static int acpi_suspend_begin(suspend_state_t pm_state) > static int acpi_suspend_enter(suspend_state_t pm_state) > { > acpi_status status = AE_OK; > + acpi_status enable_status = AE_OK; > unsigned long flags = 0; > u32 acpi_state = acpi_target_sleep_state; > > @@ -254,10 +255,19 @@ static int acpi_suspend_enter(suspend_state_t pm_state) > } > > /* If ACPI is not enabled by the BIOS, we need to enable it here. */ > - if (set_sci_en_on_resume) > + if (!set_sci_en_on_resume) > + enable_status = acpi_enable(); > + > + if (set_sci_en_on_resume || enable_status == AE_NO_HARDWARE_RESPONSE) > + /* If we're still in legacy mode then we have a problem. The > + * spec tells us that this bit is under hardware control, but > + * there's no plausible way that the OS can transition back to > + * legacy mode so our choices here are to either ignore the > + * spec or crash and burn horribly. The latter doesn't seem > + * like it's ever going to be the preferable choice, so let's > + * live dangerously. > + */ > acpi_write_bit_register(ACPI_BITREG_SCI_ENABLE, 1); > - else > - acpi_enable(); > > /* Reprogram control registers and execute _BFS */ > acpi_leave_sleep_state_prep(acpi_state); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN 2010-04-28 18:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2010-04-29 0:22 ` Len Brown 2010-04-29 21:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Len Brown @ 2010-04-29 0:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: Matthew Garrett, linux-kernel, linux-acpi, pm list, Len Brown On Wed, 28 Apr 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday 19 April 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > The ACPI spec tells us that the ACPI SCI_EN bit is under hardware control > > and shouldn't be touched by the OS. It seems that the Leading Other OS > > ignores this and some machines expect this behaviour. We have a blacklist > > for these, but given that we're able to detect the failure case and the > > alternative to breaking the spec is letting the machine crash and burn, > > let's try falling back when we know the alternative is a mostly-dead > > machine. > > > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com> > > I guess we can try that, but I'd prefer it if that went into .35. > > It _should_ be safe, but ... > > Anyway, Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> I'd like to push this patch in .34, and in .35 remove the DMI list and the boot option. One thing that has bothered me about the boot option is that it writes SCI_EN instead of callin acpi_enable() as opposed to in-addition-to acpi_enable(). If all acpi_enable() did was set SCI_EN, then it would not make a difference. However, acpi_enable() writes SMI_CMD and we really have no idea what other stuff the BIOS may do in SMM on this transition. So if we don't end up reverting this one, I'd really like to see the boot option gone in .35. thanks, Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center - > > --- > > drivers/acpi/sleep.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- > > 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c > > index f74834a..79df8d4 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c > > @@ -227,6 +227,7 @@ static int acpi_suspend_begin(suspend_state_t pm_state) > > static int acpi_suspend_enter(suspend_state_t pm_state) > > { > > acpi_status status = AE_OK; > > + acpi_status enable_status = AE_OK; > > unsigned long flags = 0; > > u32 acpi_state = acpi_target_sleep_state; > > > > @@ -254,10 +255,19 @@ static int acpi_suspend_enter(suspend_state_t pm_state) > > } > > > > /* If ACPI is not enabled by the BIOS, we need to enable it here. */ > > - if (set_sci_en_on_resume) > > + if (!set_sci_en_on_resume) > > + enable_status = acpi_enable(); > > + > > + if (set_sci_en_on_resume || enable_status == AE_NO_HARDWARE_RESPONSE) > > + /* If we're still in legacy mode then we have a problem. The > > + * spec tells us that this bit is under hardware control, but > > + * there's no plausible way that the OS can transition back to > > + * legacy mode so our choices here are to either ignore the > > + * spec or crash and burn horribly. The latter doesn't seem > > + * like it's ever going to be the preferable choice, so let's > > + * live dangerously. > > + */ > > acpi_write_bit_register(ACPI_BITREG_SCI_ENABLE, 1); > > - else > > - acpi_enable(); > > > > /* Reprogram control registers and execute _BFS */ > > acpi_leave_sleep_state_prep(acpi_state); > -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN 2010-04-29 0:22 ` Len Brown @ 2010-04-29 21:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2010-04-29 21:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Len Brown; +Cc: Matthew Garrett, linux-kernel, linux-acpi, pm list, Len Brown On Thursday 29 April 2010, Len Brown wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Apr 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Monday 19 April 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > The ACPI spec tells us that the ACPI SCI_EN bit is under hardware control > > > and shouldn't be touched by the OS. It seems that the Leading Other OS > > > ignores this and some machines expect this behaviour. We have a blacklist > > > for these, but given that we're able to detect the failure case and the > > > alternative to breaking the spec is letting the machine crash and burn, > > > let's try falling back when we know the alternative is a mostly-dead > > > machine. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com> > > > > I guess we can try that, but I'd prefer it if that went into .35. > > > > It _should_ be safe, but ... > > > > Anyway, Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> > > > I'd like to push this patch in .34, > and in .35 remove the DMI list and the boot option. > > One thing that has bothered me about the boot option > is that it writes SCI_EN instead of callin acpi_enable() > as opposed to in-addition-to acpi_enable(). > If all acpi_enable() did was set SCI_EN, then it would > not make a difference. However, acpi_enable() writes > SMI_CMD and we really have no idea what other stuff > the BIOS may do in SMM on this transition. > > So if we don't end up reverting this one, > I'd really like to see the boot option gone in .35. There are some suspend changes in .34 that may cause problems to happen for people, so I'm not sure if it's actually a good idea to introduce one more of them after -rc5. Also removing the boot option can easily wait until .36 IMHO. Rafael ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-05-01 1:45 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2010-04-19 21:13 [PATCH] acpi: Fall back to manually changing SCI_EN Matthew Garrett 2010-04-20 15:00 ` Alex Chiang 2010-04-20 17:31 ` Rezwanul_Kabir 2010-04-28 18:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2010-04-29 0:22 ` Len Brown 2010-04-29 21:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox