On Tue, 2023-11-14 at 12:36 -0500, Vivi, Rodrigo wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 05:27:18PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > > > On 13/11/2023 17:57, Teres Alexis, Alan Previn wrote: > > > On Wed, 2023-10-25 at 13:58 +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > > > On 04/10/2023 18:59, Teres Alexis, Alan Previn wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 13:46 +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > > > > > On 27/09/2023 17:36, Teres Alexis, Alan Previn wrote: > > That's a good point. > Well, current code is already bad and buggy on suspend-resume. We could get > suspend stuck forever without any clue of what happened. > At least the proposed patch add some gt_warn. But, yes, the right thing > to do should be entirely abort the suspend in case of timeout, besides the > gt_warn. alan: yes - thats was the whole idea for Patch #3. Only after putting such code did we have much better debuggability on real world production platforms + config that may not have serial-port or ramoops-dump by default. Btw, as per previous comments by Tvrtko - which i agreed with, I have moved this one single patch into a separate patch on its own. See here: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/126414/ (I also maintained the RB from you Rodrigo because the patch did not changed). And yes, the gt_warn is still in place :)
