H. Peter Anvin wrote: > 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". What document is that exactly? > >>> 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. Right now it looks like a significant number of Dell laptops are affected by this regression. That's a serious issue. -Andi -- 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
