Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 104767
RFE: please include ACPI compatible software suspend support
Last modified: 2015-01-04 17:03:12 EST
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5a) Gecko/20030728
Description of problem:
Certain laptops require ACPI support, and since ACPI and APM are mutually
exclusive, an alternative suspend method is required.
Please include the swsup kernel patches and related hibernation/suspend scripts.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Laptops utilizing ACPI power management cannot use apm suspend functionality.
swsusp isn't being considered for inclusion in any 2.4 based Red Hat kernel at
this time, and is unlikely to change.
Rawhide includes a 2.6 pre-release now (without swsusp enabled). Time
to revisit this?
P.S. BTW, I am using swsusp-enabled kernel RPMs from
ftp://ftp.mat.univie.ac.at/pub/rpm - they work fine for me.
swsusp isn't going to happen for FC2 either, due to concerns of code
quality. (And the fact that there's 3 half-arsed suspend solutions
instead of one good one right now).
CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=y in the current rawhide kernels, which some people
claim is enough for them, whilst others aren't having much luck with
it, so it's uncertain whether or not it'll be staying for the final
Hopefully this can finally happen for FC3. BTW, I have been
recompiling Raw Hide kernels with CONFIG_SOFTWARE_SUSPEND=y for a few
months now and after the 4G/4G split related problems were fixed, it
have been working perfectly.
Arjan said something about any software suspend implementation as
being highly problematic. While it may work for you, it would be
dangerous to enable for all users.
Unless you enable it, it will do nothing. So if a user enables it,
the user knows what he/she is doing. So I don't see the danger,
its not like if you press the red button your computer will self
your "if a user enables it, the user knows what he/she is doing"
is completely unfounded, given past experiences.
end-users see functionality, and they try it.
In the case of swsusp, this may work, it may not.
Personally, I'd rather not risk my data to this code, so it's staying
off until a miracle happens upstream.