Re: Bug#28383: Ejecting PCMCIA cards at suspend time
Avery Pennarun <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 1998 at 12:55:37PM -0400, unknown wrote:
> > I don't want this on my system. The cards already are started and
> > stoped correctly _if_ I use a kernel with APM support.
^^^^^^ Oops. :(
> Well, you're awfully lucky then, because mine sure aren't. And yes, I have
> APM support compiled in -- I'm the apmd maintainer.
Well, actually I'm not too lucky: I can't boot bzImage kernels with
lilo, and if my HD multicount is set to 16 I have all kinds of nasty
problems after a resume.
Since you recompiled the kernel with apm, I assume you also compiled
the pcmcia utils with apm turned? (I'm not sure if they are on in the
Debian package the configure script checks the current kernel.)
> Some laptops probably power down their pcmcia cards automatically
> when they go into suspend. I don't know why all of them don't. But
> mine doesn't.
> On my system, what happens is the kernel APM notices the suspend
> request; it forwards it down to apmd; and apmd runs a script that
> runs cardctl suspend. That last script isn't in any Debian package
> yet. If I don't run the script, the light on my pcmcia ethernet
> stays on and my laptop starts making horrible noises (really!).
> This is an AST laptop that otherwise is of _excellent_ quality, in
> my opinion.
The light goes solid you suspend or when you resume? This is a little
different than when I use a non-APM kernel. My PCMCIA card goes solid
when I resume, and the machine starts working again when I pull the
> In any case, even if your laptop does suspend pcmcia cards
> automatically, running cardctl suspend shouldn't have any adverse
> effects. I'm much more worried about Brian's problems with the SCSI
If it's necessary, it's fine with me. My message was just a kneejerk
reaction to what looked to me like something that was already
implemented. (I'm also concerned about increased latency between
pressing the suspend key and the system actually suspending.)