Please try the following patch.
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/ec.c b/drivers/acpi/ec.c
index d7d32c2..9239527 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/ec.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/ec.c
@@ -1027,8 +1027,13 @@ static struct dmi_system_id ec_dmi_table[] __initdata = {
DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "ASUSTek Computer Inc."),
DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "L4R"),}, NULL},
{
- ec_clear_on_resume, "Samsung hardware", {
- DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.")}, NULL},
+ ec_clear_on_resume, "Samsung NP530U3B", {
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD."),
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "530U3BI/530U4BI/530U4BH"),}, NULL},
+ {
+ ec_clear_on_resume, "Samsung NP530U3C", {
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD."),
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "530U3C/530U4C/532U3C"),}, NULL},
{},
};
2014-03-24 15:50 GMT+08:00 Stefan Biereigel <security@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi,
>
> starting with 3.14-rc6, the lid on my Samsung N150 behaves weird: My
> system is set up, so that it should suspend to RAM as soon as the lid is
> closed. Beginning with 3.14-rc6, the lid goes from "open" to "closed"
> correctly the first time (and the system suspends), but after resuming
> from standby (by opening the lid), the lid does not change to "open" again.
> Of course, closing the lid again does not induce suspend to RAM then.
> Opening the lid now (while not sleeping), makes ACPI notify the opening,
> so I guess ACPI "misses" or discards the lid open event from the EC when
> coming from sleep.
> Now, closing the lid again does induce suspend to RAM. This behaviour is
> reproducible: every other time, suspending works.
>
> This behaviour seems to be introduced by commit ad332c8a: ACPI / EC:
> Clear stale EC events on Samsung systems.
> Which was introduced after 3.14-rc5.
>
> When opening the lid to resume from standby, i see in dmesg:
> Mar 23 22:12:04 little1 kernel: [ 7630.932074] ACPI : EC: 1 stale EC
> events cleared
> (which comes from drivers/acpi/ec.c)
>
> Seems to me, that the "open" event is cleared from the EC, but also
> discarded instead of passed on. Shouldn't the correct behaviour be to
> report all the pending events, read from the EC, as ACPI events? Can you
> point me in a direction for fixing the issue cleanly, then I will try to
> find a solution and prepare a patch for this issue.
>
> Best regards,
> Stefan
>
> --
> 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
--
Best regards
Tianyu Lan
--
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
