On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 02:08:15PM +, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > The results are a bit unclear, I took a 2.6.22-rc4 with beep.
> > > Logged into KDE.
> > > (hardware: Dell Latitude D810)
> > >
> > > S = successfull resume
> > > D = had to resume 2 times, that means when pressing the power butto
Hi!
> > The results are a bit unclear, I took a 2.6.22-rc4 with beep.
> > Logged into KDE.
> > (hardware: Dell Latitude D810)
> >
> > S = successfull resume
> > D = had to resume 2 times, that means when pressing the power button the
> > LED goes from blinking to on and after a few seconds it goe
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 09:46:34PM +0200, Christian Leber wrote:
> The results are a bit unclear, I took a 2.6.22-rc4 with beep.
> Logged into KDE.
> (hardware: Dell Latitude D810)
>
> S = successfull resume
> D = had to resume 2 times, that means when pressing the power button the
> LED goes fro
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 03:08:17PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Starting beeper as soon as ACPI sleep returns is very useful in
> debugging "apparently dead" machines. If it beeps at all, it makes
> sense to start playing with CMOS tracer.
thank you very much Pavel
The results are a bit unclear,
On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 03:12:57PM +, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> (please group reply)
>
> > > How does the beep get turned off again?
> > May be it is turn off by the speaker driver.
> >
> >
> > BTW can't we do something with led ? This way it can be always enabled
> > without anoying p
Hi!
(please group reply)
> > How does the beep get turned off again?
> May be it is turn off by the speaker driver.
>
>
> BTW can't we do something with led ? This way it can be always enabled
> without anoying people
It would be more complex code, afaict, and ps/2 keyboard may be
absent. But
On Wednesday, 13 June 2007 14:28, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > Ok. I'll take Pavel's silence as agreement too. I'll be a little slow
> > > > (as usual, nowadays!), but will try to get it done next week. I think I
> > > > can in clear conscience do it on Redhat time if I don't manage it
> >
Hi!
> > > Ok. I'll take Pavel's silence as agreement too. I'll be a little slow
> > > (as usual, nowadays!), but will try to get it done next week. I think I
> > > can in clear conscience do it on Redhat time if I don't manage it
> > > beforehand.
> >
> > Well, everyone wants it so what can I do.
Hi.
On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 10:24 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > Wouldn't it be much more useful if it was unconditionally compiled in
> > > > and controlled instead by a sysfs entry? That way it will be far more
> > > > useful to $user who doesn't know or want to know how to compile an
Hi!
> > > Wouldn't it be much more useful if it was unconditionally compiled in
> > > and controlled instead by a sysfs entry? That way it will be far more
> > > useful to $user who doesn't know or want to know how to compile and
> > > install a kernel, but wants to do what they can to get provide
Hi.
On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 14:11 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday, 12 June 2007 00:42, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > Wouldn't it be much more useful if it was unconditionally compiled in
> > and controlled instead by a sysfs entry? That way it will be far more
> > us
Hi,
On Tuesday, 12 June 2007 00:42, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Wouldn't it be much more useful if it was unconditionally compiled in
> and controlled instead by a sysfs entry? That way it will be far more
> useful to $user who doesn't know or want to know how to compile and
> install a ker
Hi.
Wouldn't it be much more useful if it was unconditionally compiled in
and controlled instead by a sysfs entry? That way it will be far more
useful to $user who doesn't know or want to know how to compile and
install a kernel, but wants to do what they can to get provide helpful
debugging info
Hi!
> > Starting beeper as soon as ACPI sleep returns is very useful in
> > debugging "apparently dead" machines. If it beeps at all, it makes
> > sense to start playing with CMOS tracer.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S
Hi,
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 12:00:34 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 15:08:17 +0200
> Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> How does the beep get turned off again?
May be it is turn off by the speaker driver.
BTW can't we do something with led ? This way it can be always
On Sat, 9 Jun 2007 15:08:17 +0200
Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Starting beeper as soon as ACPI sleep returns is very useful in
> debugging "apparently dead" machines. If it beeps at all, it makes
> sense to start playing with CMOS tracer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PR
Hi!
> How about (WARNING! I never have written i386 assembly, my last assembly
> experience was 20 years ago on Z80, so this is basically just copy'n paste,
> but i hope you get the idea):
We probably can do that, if there's big enough demand.
> > --- a/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S
> > +++ b/a
On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 03:08:17PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
How about (WARNING! I never have written i386 assembly, my last assembly
experience was 20 years ago on Z80, so this is basically just copy'n paste,
but i hope you get the idea):
> --- a/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S
> +++ b/arch/i386
On Sun 2007-06-10 09:27:55, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 00:54 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Sat 2007-06-09 15:16:04, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2007-06-09 15:08:17 +0200, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Starting beeper as soon as
Hi.
On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 00:54 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sat 2007-06-09 15:16:04, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-06-09 15:08:17 +0200, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Starting beeper as soon as ACPI sleep returns is very useful in
> > > debugging "apparently
On Sat 2007-06-09 15:16:04, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-06-09 15:08:17 +0200, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Starting beeper as soon as ACPI sleep returns is very useful in
> > debugging "apparently dead" machines. If it beeps at all, it makes
> > sense to start playin
On Sat, 2007-06-09 15:08:17 +0200, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Starting beeper as soon as ACPI sleep returns is very useful in
> debugging "apparently dead" machines. If it beeps at all, it makes
> sense to start playing with CMOS tracer.
I'd even go so far and implement it uncond
Starting beeper as soon as ACPI sleep returns is very useful in
debugging "apparently dead" machines. If it beeps at all, it makes
sense to start playing with CMOS tracer.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S b/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/wakeup.S
23 matches
Mail list logo
