Andi Kleen wrote:
It still seems incredibly risky to push this for 2.6.26, especially
given the Elan revelation.
Do Elans even support S3?
I don't know if they do, but I don't know offhand the extent of machines
that may have that problem, especially since Intel now document it as
"failures are readily seen".
I think it needs to be tested on the 2.6.27
track, and then possibly be pushed back via the 2.6.26-stable route.
I'm just not sure how many suspend/resume cycles people really do
on a early (pre -rc) mainline kernel (or in linux-next for that
matter). You usually have to install on a laptop and actually
use it.
>
Since this code is only executed on resume some directed testing
would be better. That is what Rafael asked for in this mail.
The issue is mostly if it breaks some obscure system. I have put it on
my laptop, Ingo has it on this test system with a suspend-testing cycle,
and so on, but the number of systems exposed is going to be small.
I think it would be ok for .26 if we can get confirmation it works
on a few systems with S3 suspend/resume.
That we already know it does, but it took a long time even until the
regression came to light.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
