On Tuesday 25 September 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
As this whole "separate suspend and hibernate" change seems to have been
trickier than expected, I have done some additional testing using
2.6.23-rc8 plus both patches referred to above.
I compiled kernels (i386) for my laptop (Toshiba Satellite A40) with:
A) PM + SUSPEND + HIBERNATION + ACPI
B) PM + SUSPEND + ACPI
C) PM + HIBERNATION + ACPI
D) PM + ACPI
E) PM + SUSPEND + HIBERNATION but _without_ ACPI
F) without PM
In all cases CONFIG_APM was not set; all compiled without errors.
With all I have have booted, tried to suspend (close lid, which runs sleep
script, which does 'echo mem >/sys/power/state'), tried to hibernate ('echo
disk >/sys/power/state') and powered off (all from KDE sessions).
RESULTS
boot s2ram s2disk off
A) OK OK OK OK
B) OK OK N/A OK
C) OK OK 1) OK OK
D) OK 2) OK 1) N/A OK
E) OK 3) N/A 4) ??? 5) Only halted 6)
F) OK N/A N/A Only halted 6)
Comments:
1) sleep script ran, but laptop stayed on
2) dmesg lists S0,S5 supported
/proc/acpi/{sleep,wakeup} do not exist (is that correct?)
3) /proc/acpi/{sleep,wakeup} do not exist; /sys/power/state only has 'mem'
so SUSPEND seems missing even though compiled in
4) sleep script did not even run (as expected)
5) System did suspend, but power stayed on with on console:
Shutdown: hda \ Power down. \ Shutdown: hda \ hda: lost interrupt (2x)
\ psmouse.c: Failed to deactivate mouse on isa0060/serio1
System powered off manually and resumed correctly after that
6) System halted correctly, but did not power off automatically
The results for E and F are possibly correct as basically the config
(without ACPI) was broken for this laptop. In fact, I was somewhat
surprised how well it behaved without ACPI.
I suspect that whether a system powers off without ACPI or not can depend on
the system?
I have dmesg after boot and some other info available for all kernels if
anybody is interested. If any additional tests are wanted, please ask.
Cheers,
FJP
-
