RE: 2.6.16-rc5: known regressions [TP 600X S3, vanilla DSDT]

["Yu, Luming" <luming.yu@intel.com>]

>> Please try additional ugly hack
>>  5. in acpi_os_queue_for_execution:
>>	if(acpi_in_suspend == YES)
>>		do nothing.
>
>Am compiling it.  If acpi_in_suspend, I've had it do
>return_ACPI_STATUS(AE_BAD_PARAMETER).  Is there a better error code to
>use?  I didn't want to use AE_OK, since the caller might think that
>the function will be executed eventually, and might do something silly
>like wait for it to be executed -- and produce another hang.  I didn't
>know, but to be safe I wanted to return an error code.

just return AE_OK, because we are hacking. :-)
The only place that could have issue is in acpi_ev_global_lock_handler,
you can add a printk there, then you can know what happened.

>
>> Also, please add acpi_debug_layer=0x10 acpi_debug_leve=0x10 boot
>> option, then you can observe what methods were executed before
>> suspend.
>
>That's in my lilo.conf so all kernels I test use those options.  I can
>send you the dmesgs from the suspends without the ugly hack (and will
>send them from the upcoming suspends, with the ugly hack).

Thanks, I'm waiting for that to understand if the hack is clean for
killing unwanted AML methods call.