Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 16:06:54 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" <freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Investigating failed suspend/resume T61 Message-ID: <538641DE.5030309@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201405281556.37651.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <1400861698.1126.0.camel@bruno> <201405281344.46430.jhb@freebsd.org> <538627E3.7080308@FreeBSD.org> <201405281556.37651.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2014-05-28 15:56:37 -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 2:16:03 pm Jung-uk Kim wrote: >> On 2014-05-28 13:44:46 -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >>> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 12:44:44 pm Jung-uk Kim wrote: >>>> On 2014-05-28 12:20:24 -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 12:10:55 pm Sean Bruno wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 10:54 -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 7:08:36 am Sean Bruno >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 16:14 -0400, John Baldwin >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 1:39:48 pm Sean Bruno >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 11:32 -0400, John Baldwin >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, May 23, 2014 12:14:58 pm Sean Bruno >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Trying to figure out the failures on suspend >>>>>>>>>>>> resume for the T61 I have. I see a little >>>>>>>>>>>> acpi error at host startup, but I don't think >>>>>>>>>>>> its related. However, I'm not sure what it >>>>>>>>>>>> means. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> sean >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #1 r265820: Sat May 10 >>>>>>>>>>>> 15:13:37 PDT 2014 >>>>>>>>>>>> sbruno@bruno:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BRUNO >>>>>>>>>>>> amd64 FreeBSD clang version 3.4 >>>>>>>>>>>> (tags/RELEASE_34/final 197956) 20140216 VT: >>>>>>>>>>>> running with driver "vga". CPU: Intel(R) >>>>>>>>>>>> Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T7300 @ 2.00GHz >>>>>>>>>>>> (1995.04-MHz K8-class CPU) >>>>>>>>>>>> Origin="GenuineIntel" Id=0x6fa Family=0x6 >>>>>>>>>>>> Model=0xf Stepping=10 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>> > Features=0xbfebfbff<FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,PBE> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> > Features2=0xe3bd<SSE3,DTES64,MON,DS_CPL,VMX,EST,TM2,SSSE3,CX16,xTPR,PDCM> >>>>>>>>>>>> AMD Features=0x20100800<SYSCALL,NX,LM> AMD >>>>>>>>>>>> Features2=0x1<LAHF> TSC: P-state invariant, >>>>>>>>>>>> performance statistics real memory = >>>>>>>>>>>> 2147483648 (2048 MB) avail memory = >>>>>>>>>>>> 2007138304 (1914 MB) Event timer "LAPIC" >>>>>>>>>>>> quality 400 ACPI APIC Table: <LENOVO TP-7L >>>>>>>>>>>> > FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System >>>>>>>>>>>> Detected: 2 CPUs FreeBSD/SMP: 1 package(s) x >>>>>>>>>>>> 2 core(s) cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): >>>>>>>>>>>> APIC ID: 1 ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X >>>>>>>>>>>> length mismatch in FADT/Gpe1Block: 0/32 >>>>>>>>>>>> (20130823/tbfadt-601) ACPI BIOS Warning >>>>>>>>>>>> (bug): Optional FADT field Gpe1Block has zero >>>>>>>>>>>> address or length: 0x000000000000102C/0x0 >>>>>>>>>>>> (20130823/tbfadt-630) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It might be related as Gpe1Block describes a >>>>>>>>>>> register set that IIRC is used to enter sleep >>>>>>>>>>> states. Can you put your acpidump -t >>>>>>>>>>> somewhere? (No need for -d as this is in the >>>>>>>>>>> FADT, not the DSDT.) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Here --> >>>>>>>>>> http://people.freebsd.org/~sbruno/T61_acpidump.txt >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ah, so the warning is due to the fact that the 'FACP' >>>>>>>>> table has 'X_GPE1_BLOCK' but no 'GPE1_BLOCK'. >>>>>>>>> (Note how it has both 'GPE0_BLOCK' and >>>>>>>>> 'X_GPE0_BLOCK' which say the same thing.) Try this >>>>>>>>> workaround to quiet the warning. I've no idea if >>>>>>>>> it will help at all with suspend/resume. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Index: >>>>>>>>> sys/contrib/dev/acpica/components/tables/tbfadt.c >>>>>>>>> =================================================================== >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> - --- tbfadt.c (revision 266442) >>>>>>>>> +++ tbfadt.c (working copy) @@ -601,6 +601,10 @@ >>>>>>>>> AcpiTbValidateFadt ( ACPI_BIOS_WARNING ((AE_INFO, >>>>>>>>> "32/64X length mismatch in FADT/%s: %u/%u", Name, >>>>>>>>> ACPI_MUL_8 (Length), Address64->BitWidth)); + >>>>>>>>> if (Length == 0) + { + Length = ACPI_DIV_8 >>>>>>>>> (Address64->BitWidth); + } } >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> if (FadtInfoTable[i].Type & ACPI_FADT_REQUIRED) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One warning went away, one remains, not sure if its >>>>>>>> meaningful or not. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X length mismatch in >>>>>>>> FADT/Gpe1Block: 0/32 (20130823/tbfadt-601) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, I didn't remove that warning, I just fixed it to >>>>>>> use the 64-bit length when the 32-bit length was zero >>>>>>> when that warning fires. Does this seem to have made >>>>>>> any difference with anything on the laptop? (E.g. it >>>>>>> might possibly affect hotkeys, etc.) >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Believe it or not, but I just suspend/resumed on the >>>>>> thing, TWICE. Once from the xfce menu -> suspend and >>>>>> once from Fn->moonsymbolsuspendsleepthing on the F4 key. >>>>>> >>>>>> Good grief. Thanks John. >>>>> >>>>> Humm. I wonder if we can get the Intel guys to accept the >>>>> patch upstream? >>>> >>>> Yes, ACPICA guys are very open to patches. Actually there >>>> are several ways to report bugs and/or submit patches. >>>> >>>> Bug reports: https://bugs.acpica.org >>>> >>>> Developer ML: >>>> https://lists.acpica.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >>>> >>>> Source repository: https://github.com/acpica/acpica >>>> >>>> However, I'm afraid the following commit may have nullified >>>> your patch. >>>> >>>> https://github.com/acpica/acpica/commit/8149df49 >>> >>> It looks to only be adjusting the preference for the Address >>> portion. It still uses the length field from FADT and doesn't >>> use the length from the GAS. >> >> Okay. >> >> BTW, I just read your patch carefully but I failed to understand >> how shutting up a warning can fix any problem at all. Did you >> mean to patch internal table? > > It shuts up the second warning. The first warning is still legit > (there is a length mismatch), but it handles the special case of > the 32-bit length being zero by using the 64-bit length. Once a > valid length is set, the second warning goes away Yes, I know that. > (and GPE1 works which apparently fixes resume for Sean). It is really puzzling because your patch does not change anything functionally but shutting up the warning message. :-( Jung-uk Kim -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJThkHeAAoJEHyflib82/FGC+YH/1rlo23HKXhrZVqGeP8zKsP/ OQj7rcF3sX0bvCymX/iq/I0IXLlAiZna/FRo+vq4RaL0gRHEefPdhg5z/K0UGd7l 00B3tgUhQglp0SooHCl+I97+9otHRCgSrlhQ1RCmIrMxlb+057Qn92GV6fGFpFTO f/NMrUp3SGmp/wI44B5KHryitoGJYvFEPkTA1uL2UkHzCqL313uOBIU2jtGPtqo4 cbCgiSPkfovbjM1qKBsyD2htme0k7Zqc734nFfT+ZxJEw5y2V6HUNCSnfmR520jk BRLGBsNJ1Xh3sIcE3QgEAueFnutYKsyOgOzbJp6Kjo8FXHHgaUcd5lSBtqo5pf4= =dTxX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?538641DE.5030309>