On Monday, April 30, 2012, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, 30 Apr 2012, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: Oleksij Rempel <bug-track@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > This patch makes _SxD/_SxW check follow the ACPI 4.0a specification > > > more closely and fixes suspend bug found on ASUS Zenbook UX31E. > > > > > > Some OEM use _SxD fileds do blacklist brocken Dx states. > > > If _SxD/_SxW return values are check before suspend as appropriate, > > > some nasty suspend/resume issues may be avoided. > > > > > > References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42728 > > > Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <bug-track@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > > > > Bjorn, Len, > > > > > > This is -stable material and therefore v3.4 as well, IMO. �Please let me > > > know if one of you can take it or whether you want me to handle it all the > > > way to Linus. > > > > I'm OK with this from a PCI perspective. Most of the change is in > > ACPI, so I propose that either you or Len take care of it. > > > > The second paragraph of the changelog has several typos > > (fileds/fields, do/to, brocken/broken, etc). > > It also turns out that the normal wakeup mechanism doesn't work for the > devices in question. Can this be detected by ACPI? We don't want to > tell userspace that wakeup works when in fact it doesn't. No, we don't, but if there's _PRW and/or _DSW/_PSW for the device, we really have to assume that the device is able to wake up the system. Moreover, if those methods don't return error codes, we have no way to say there's anything wrong. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
