On 02/20/16 22:42, Mark Kettenis wrote:
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 11:32:15 -0800
From: Mike Larkin <[email protected]>
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:04:28AM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
From: Noth <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 07:22:56 +0100
On 02/20/16 06:46, Theo de Raadt wrote:
I'm using VAIO Z. Hibernation works, but my vaio also wakes back
immediately. I have a diff to avoid this wakeup. Unhibernation works
fine.
The diff seems very bad. :)
Index: sys/dev/acpi/acpi.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /disk/cvs/openbsd/src/sys/dev/acpi/acpi.c,v
retrieving revision 1.303
diff -u -p -r1.303 acpi.c
--- sys/dev/acpi/acpi.c 14 Jan 2016 21:37:18 -0000 1.303
+++ sys/dev/acpi/acpi.c 21 Jan 2016 08:25:59 -0000
@@ -2048,6 +2048,7 @@ acpi_enable_wakegpes(struct acpi_softc *
{
struct acpi_wakeq *wentry;
+return;
SIMPLEQ_FOREACH(wentry, &sc->sc_wakedevs, q_next) {
dnprintf(10, "%.4s(S%d) gpe %.2x\n", wentry->q_node->name,
wentry->q_state,
That is a very interesting diff. Mike will probably remember this.
Was it Berlin? I think sebastia's Viao had a quirk where a wakeup gpe
was doing something wrong.
That will assuredly break most thinkpads :)
That patch works for me, thank you Masahiko. Looks like OpenBSD runs
pretty well on this little laptop :)
Next step in the debugging process would be to find out which of the
wake GPEs is actually responsible.
I have a few reports of these sorts of things failing (eg, resuming
immediately) in my inbox from the past. Every time I've tried to
debug these, even when disabling all the GPEs, the machine still
woke.
Do you have a better idea?
In this case disabling the GPEs definitely does help.
Well is their anything further I can do to help the debugging ? I did
notice the processors were running close to 100% system after a wake up
when using the patch from Yasuoka. Remember if I disable xhci using UKC
suspend works anyway.
