On Saturday 04 July 2009, Michael Witten wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:39:59 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote > (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-acpi/msg22661.html): > > > In fact, we need to do this entire thing differently. > > > > The basic problem is that cpufreq_suspend() is a sysdev thing, so it will > > always be called with iterrupts off and *only* for CPU0. So, it looks like > > the majority of things we do there is just unnecessary (at least). > > What's the status? This bug is driving me nuts. Unfortunately, still unresolved. Rafael -- 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
