Bug#964839: Only the first PM_SUSPEND_PREPARE-event is missing
Hi,
While using the new kernel with the mentioned workaround (i.e. enabling
the graphics card manually before suspending), I've noticed something
that might help to understand this issue better:
Only the first PM_SUSPEND_PREPARE-event is missing. When I get through
the first suspend, all following suspends work as expected. See the
following annotated excerpt from dmesg:
# Initial system boot
[ 15.564193] bbswitch: version 0.8
[ 15.564198] bbswitch: Found integrated VGA device 0000:00:02.0:
\_SB_.PCI0.GFX0
[ 15.564222] bbswitch: Found discrete VGA device 0000:01:00.0:
\_SB_.PCI0.PEG0.PEGP
[ 15.565812] bbswitch: detected an Optimus _DSM function
[ 15.565820] bbswitch: Succesfully loaded. Discrete card 0000:01:00.0
is on
[ 15.910080] bbswitch: disabling discrete graphics
# boot completed, I manually enable the graphics card
[ 33.026943] bbswitch: enabling discrete graphics
# suspend, note the missing event type 3
[ 44.663868] bbswitch: bbswitch_pm_handler: event_type=4
is_card_disabled=0 dis_before_suspend_disabled=0
# wakeup from suspend completed, I manually disable the graphics card
[ 49.237038] bbswitch: disabling discrete graphics
# now second suspend, the event type 3 is generated successfully, the
graphics card is automatically disabled as expected
[ 56.211317] bbswitch: bbswitch_pm_handler: event_type=3
is_card_disabled=1 dis_before_suspend_disabled=0
[ 56.211322] bbswitch: enabling discrete graphics
# wake up from second suspend, the graphics card is disabled as expected
[ 64.060784] bbswitch: bbswitch_pm_handler: event_type=4
is_card_disabled=0 dis_before_suspend_disabled=1
[ 64.060786] bbswitch: disabling discrete graphics
# And just to demonstrate: activating and deactivating the graphics card
now still works
[ 65.428920] bbswitch: enabling discrete graphics
[ 68.149054] bbswitch: disabling discrete graphics
Just for reference, I am using now kernel: 5.7.0-2-amd64 #1 SMP Debian
5.7.10-1 (2020-07-26) x86_64 GNU/Linux
--
Kind regards,
Felix Dörre
Reply to: