Description of problem: When I use 'pm-hibernate', the system does not hibernate. It goes through the motions, but never writes its state to swap, and returns to the calling shell with /etc/pm/functions: line 196: echo: write error: Cannot allocate memory Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Using pm-utils-0.19-3 How reproducible: Most of the time. I've been able to get pm-hibernate to work intermittently, but never twice in a row. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Boot system to runlevel 5 2. Type 'pm-hibernate' 3. Actual results: System returns after a short pause with an error message. Expected results: System should suspend and resume. Additional info: Here's a grab-bag of system details: * dual-core 2GHz P4 (hyperthreading, EM64T) * Intel 955 mobo (D955KBK) * ATI radeon X1800 video card (using ati-fglrx from livna.org) * 1GiB of RAM, 3GiB of swap * /etc/pm/config as follows (two sound devices to disable on suspend) SUSPEND_MODULES="button snd_hda_intel snd_usb_audio" HIBERNATE_RESUME_POST_VIDEO="no"
Are you using a Xen kernel by any chance? If yes, please try it with a normal kernel instead and see if you get the same problem. Read ya, Phil
Linux huggy 2.6.18-1.2868.fc6 #1 SMP Fri Dec 15 17:29:48 EST 2006 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux This is a stock x86_64 kernel from Fedora updates. I'm not using Xen.
Ah, yea. 64bit kernels are also know to still have problems doing proper suspend or hibernate in many cases. Setting it to kernel as this is definitely a kernel problem though. Read ya, Phil
Are you still seeing this issue? If so, could you please attach dmesg from a failed attempt? Could you also try a more recent kernel?
I still get this problem with 2.6.20-1.2962.fc6. I'm attaching a recent dmesg file. Note that I tried the following hack from http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/2/106 # echo $((400*1024*1024)) > /sys/power/image_size and initial tests indicate that suspend/resume works with this. As per the message, I don't understand it either.
Created attachment 159629 [details] Kernel dmesg output
Is this better with newer kernels? I haven't checked, but Rafael has probably merged that patch into vanilla if it helped (or made other fixes).
Fedora apologizes that these issues have not been resolved yet. We're sorry it's taken so long for your bug to be properly triaged and acted on. We appreciate the time you took to report this issue and want to make sure no important bugs slip through the cracks. If you're currently running a version of Fedora Core between 1 and 6, please note that Fedora no longer maintains these releases. We strongly encourage you to upgrade to a current Fedora release. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained and closing them. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle/EOL If this bug is still open against Fedora Core 1 through 6, thirty days from now, it will be closed 'WONTFIX'. If you can reporduce this bug in the latest Fedora version, please change to the respective version. If you are unable to do this, please add a comment to this bug requesting the change. Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we are following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again. And if you'd like to join the bug triage team to help make things better, check out http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
This bug is open for a Fedora version that is no longer maintained and will not be fixed by Fedora. Therefore we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen thus bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.