[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201207082208.19664.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 22:08:19 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@...il.com>,
Bob Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>
Cc: Octavio Alvarez <alvarezp@...arezp.com>,
Adrian Knoth <adi@...omp.erfurt.thur.de>,
Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ACPI: Leave Bus Master Arbitration enabled for suspend/resume
On Sunday, July 08, 2012, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> This is an old suspend/resume lockup fix:
>
> commit 2780cc4660e1
> Author: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
> Date: Thu Dec 23 13:43:30 2004 -0500
>
> [ACPI] Fix suspend/resume lockup issue
> by leaving Bus Master Arbitration enabled.
> The ACPI spec mandates it be disabled only for C3.
>
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3599
>
> Signed-off-by: David Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
>
> The bug snuck back in in commit 2feec47d4c5f (ACPICA: ACPI 5: Support
> for new FADT SleepStatus, SleepControl registers, 2012-02-14),
> presumably by copy/pasting a copy of the code without that fix for the
> legacy case.
>
> On affected machines, after that commit, the machine locks up hard on
> resume from suspend. The same fix as seven years ago still works.
>
> Addresses <https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43641>.
>
> Reported-bisected-and-tested-by: Octavio Alvarez <alvarezp@...arezp.com>
> Reported-by: Adrian Knoth <adi@...omp.erfurt.thur.de>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@...il.com>
> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 3.4
> ---
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > Can you please repost it with _both_ the changelog and the patch?
>
> Here you go. Sorry about that.
Thanks!
Applied to the linux-next branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
I think I'll push it for v3.6, since the bug is serious and is a regression.
Bob, I think we should incorporate this into ACPICA, shouldn't we?
Rafael
> drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c | 22 ----------------------
> 1 file changed, 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c
> index 0ed85cac3231..615996a36bed 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwsleep.c
> @@ -95,18 +95,6 @@ acpi_status acpi_hw_legacy_sleep(u8 sleep_state, u8 flags)
> return_ACPI_STATUS(status);
> }
>
> - if (sleep_state != ACPI_STATE_S5) {
> - /*
> - * Disable BM arbitration. This feature is contained within an
> - * optional register (PM2 Control), so ignore a BAD_ADDRESS
> - * exception.
> - */
> - status = acpi_write_bit_register(ACPI_BITREG_ARB_DISABLE, 1);
> - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) && (status != AE_BAD_ADDRESS)) {
> - return_ACPI_STATUS(status);
> - }
> - }
> -
> /*
> * 1) Disable/Clear all GPEs
> * 2) Enable all wakeup GPEs
> @@ -364,16 +352,6 @@ acpi_status acpi_hw_legacy_wake(u8 sleep_state, u8 flags)
> [ACPI_EVENT_POWER_BUTTON].
> status_register_id, ACPI_CLEAR_STATUS);
>
> - /*
> - * Enable BM arbitration. This feature is contained within an
> - * optional register (PM2 Control), so ignore a BAD_ADDRESS
> - * exception.
> - */
> - status = acpi_write_bit_register(ACPI_BITREG_ARB_DISABLE, 0);
> - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) && (status != AE_BAD_ADDRESS)) {
> - return_ACPI_STATUS(status);
> - }
> -
> acpi_hw_execute_sleep_method(METHOD_PATHNAME__SST, ACPI_SST_WORKING);
> return_ACPI_STATUS(status);
> }
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists