Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S280601AbRKBIeB>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 03:34:01 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S280600AbRKBIdl>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 03:33:41 -0500
Received: from mel-rti20.wanadoo.fr ([193.252.19.91]:32169 "EHLO
	mel-rti20.wanadoo.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id <S280601AbRKBIde>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 03:33:34 -0500
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 09:31:27 +0100 (CET)
From: Pascal Lengard <pascal.lengard@wanadoo.fr>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
cc: Pascal Lengard <pascal.lengard@wanadoo.fr>, <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        <suonpaa@iki.fi>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: apm suspend broken ?
In-Reply-To: <20011101015136.084c65cd.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111020918020.466-100000@h2o.chezmoi.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hello Everyone,

Some news about the APM problem on Dell Latitude C600:

On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Can you try the following patch, please?  This is the relevant part of a
> patch that was applied to Alan Cox's kernels.

I tested this patch against 2.4.10-pre12 (first version showing problem)
and 2.4.13.
I tested also plain 2.4.13-ac5 since you (Stephen) said that this patch
was taken from the last Alan kernel.

Both kernels show the same behaviour, so please read on since 2.4.13-ac5
is impacted by this bug.


I tested the patch against 2.4.10-pre12.
(I had to suppress a line in arch/i386/kernel/dmi_scan.c to make it compile
since it defined pm_kbd_request_override differently than the definition in
keyboard.h) The patch seemed to correct the apm behaviour nicely (I use
'seem' since I tried it only once in a hurry to test against 2.4.13).

So I tested the same patch against 2.4.13. It went through without any
reject, compilation was fine also ... I tested also 2.4.13-ac5 and both
show the same ill behaviour:

Fn+Suspend (or launching "apm -s") does not ALWAYS suspend the laptop. 
Sometimes, it blanks the screen but leaves the lcd light on, the cpu fan is 
on also. Pressing Fn+D to turn off the lcd light completes the job and the 
laptop finaly suspends completely.
Typing "apm -s" shows the same behaviour, it did suspend the laptop ONCE out
of 12 tests, all other 11 tests required to press Fn+D after to suspend.

By the way, If I hit ANY key between Fn+Suspend and Fn+D, the keyboard
is misbehaving after resume: CapsLock is inverted, Ctrl, Shift and Alt
are dead.

Under some rare conditions, apm -s works, but in general, asking the bios 
to turn off the lcd light (Fn+D) helps a lot.
I guess the keyboard problem is not a real one since if "apm -s" did its job 
completely I would no chance to press any key before the lcd light goes off.

Statistically, 2.4.13-ac5 seems to show better luck in suspending (it works
correctly more often than 2.4.13+patch from Stephen).

Pascal

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/