> > > > I'm wondering if that veto business is really needed. Why not reject
> > > > *all* APM rejectable events, and then let the userspace event handler
> > > > send the system to sleep or turn it off? Anybody au fait with the APM
> > > > spec?
> > >
> > > My thinkpad actually started blinking with some LED when you pressed
> > > the button. LED went off when you rejected or when sleep was
> > > completed.
> > Does the led start blinking when the system sends an apm suspend? In
> > that case I don't think you'd notice the brief period between the
> > REJECT and the following suspend from userspace ;-)
> Are you sure? A suspend takes about 5-10 seconds on my laptop.
What I do is killall apmd, then apm -s and it is more or less
instant. [Are you using suspend-to-disk? AFAICS my toshiba can not do
suspend to disk, that's why I'm interested].
> (It was noticably faster with 2.3 kernels, btw. Now it spends a second
> or two apparently not noticing the APM event (though the BIOS is making
> the speaker beep ), then syncing the disk, then maybe another pause, then
> maybe some more disk activity, then finally shutting down. 2.3 started
> t he disk activity immediately and didn't pause. Perhaps 2.4.3 mm
Take a look what apmd does. I'm killing it before apm -s.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 30 2001 - 21:00:13 EST