Re: ARPM shutdown oops (Re: [stable] [patch 09/12] Fix SMP poweroff hangs)

[Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Kevin wrote:
> > The last kernel I used was 6.2.22 the "dmesg" the file is attached:
> >
> > dmesg 2.6.22 line 158 >  apm: overridden by ACPI.
> >
> > dmesg, APM on, has no line > apm: overridden by ACPI.
>
> Ok, this is the real reason. 
>
> The APM code does:
>
>         if (PM_IS_ACTIVE()) {
>                 printk(KERN_NOTICE "apm: overridden by ACPI.\n");
>                 apm_info.disabled = 1;
>                 return -ENODEV;
>         }
>
> and in previous kernels that would notice that you have ACPI enabled, and 
> APM gets shut out, and you never see your buggy APM BIOS.
>
> In 2.6.23, this apparently doesn't happen for some reason.
>
> And I think I see the problem: it's a config change. You don't have 
> PM_LEGACY enabled. Your config file diff shows:
>
> 	-CONFIG_PM_LEGACY=y
> 	+# CONFIG_PM_LEGACY is not set
>
> I suspect we should make CONFIG_APM either depend on, or select, 
> PM_LEGACY. But as far as I can see, nothing has actually changed in this 
> area in the kernel, and this bug has been there before - just your config 
> change made it appear. 
>
> Rafael? Stephen? Opinions? I'd think that making APM depend on 
> CONFIG_PM_LEGACY is the right thing to do these days..

Speaking as the author of

	[PATCH] move pm_register/etc. to CONFIG_PM_LEGACY, pm_legacy.h

I agree.  arch/i386/kernel/apm.c clearly requires 
include/linux/pm_legacy.h and the legacy PM API.

I would vote for a dependency rather than select, but don't have any 
strong feelings on the matter...

	Jeff


-
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/