On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Dominik Brodowski <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 10:32:15PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Dominik Brodowski >> <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 03:08:57PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >> On Monday, June 05, 2017 11:05:21 AM Dominik Brodowski wrote: >> >> > unfortunately, commit eed4d47efe95 (ACPI / sleep: Ignore spurious SCI >> >> > wakeups from suspend-to-idle) breaks suspend-to-mem on my Dell XPS 13 >> >> > (9343) up to v4.12-rc4: Issuing >> >> > >> >> > $ echo "mem" > /sys/power/state >> >> > >> >> > in the initramfs returns, after a while, with "write error: Resource >> >> > busy", and the system *not* having entered the sleep state in between. >> >> >> >> Why initramfs? >> > >> > Easiest and quickest to test, with no userspace in between to interfere. >> > During normal operations, I see suspend-to-mem fail, then a fall-back to >> > s2idle... >> >> I see, OK. >> >> >> > In contrast thereto, 8a537ece3d94 (PM / wakeup: Integrate mechanism to abort >> >> > transitions in progress) still works fine, and allows to enter >> >> > suspend-to-mem. No real difference is to be seen in dmesg, with the notable >> >> > exception of >> >> > >> >> > ACPI: Low-level resume complete >> >> > ACPI : EC: EC started >> >> > PM: Restoring platform NVS memory >> >> > Suspended for N.NNNN seconds >> >> > >> >> > only showing up on working kernels. Reverting eed4d47efe95 on top of >> >> > v4.12-rc4 restores suspend-to-mem to work as expected. >> >> >> >> I'm sure it is not necessary to revert all of it. >> > >> > Thought so, just wanted to confirm that eed4d47efe95 is indeed the culprit. >> > >> >> I guess what happens is that you get a wakeup event during suspend which is >> >> aborted as a result. >> >> >> >> Please apply the partial revert below and see if it makes the issue go away. >> > >> > Yes it does -- with this patch applied on top of v4.12-rc4, everything works >> > as expected. Both in initramfs and during normal runtime operations. Only an >> > (probably unrelated) issue still appears during resume, namely "cache" >> > complaining that the non-boot CPUs should not be sleeping: >> >> That's unrelated. >> >> OK, this still leaves us with three possibilities. >> >> Can you please try to apply the device_pm.c part of the partial revert >> alone and see if that helps (and if not, same for the button.c and >> battery.c changes)? > > Indeed, the device_pm.c part of the partial revert helps on its own. > For completeness, applying only the chunks for button.c or battery.c > does not help; That's kind of expected. :-) Anyway, I decided to revert commit eed4d47efe95 entirely as it turns out to be premature and causes too many problems to happen all over. 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
