On Thursday 19 February 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 14:00 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday 19 February 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 21:27 +1300, Paul Collins wrote: > > > > > Just for laughs I slapped together the following, which seems to do > > > > the > > > > > job, although not especially tidily. > > > > > > > > And it doesn't even do the job. Judging by this new trace, submitting > > > > input events from the via-pmu resume function is still too early. > > > > > > > What's up Thomas ? We can't call gettimeofday() from a sysdev > > > suspend/resume ? That's a little bit too harsh no ? > > > > Perhaps the ordering is wrong (ie. via-pmu resume happens bevore timekeeping > > resume)? > > In this case, maybe gtod should just return the frozen time (ie, last > time at the time of suspend) rather than WARN ? This might work, but there seem to be more problems like this (cpufreq vs timekeeping for example). I think we need a more general approach. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
