On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 07:04 +-0200, Greg KH wrote: +AD4 On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 04:01:35PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: +AD4 +AD4 On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 00:44 +-0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 12:19 AM Bart Van Assche +ADw-bvanassche+AEA-acm.org+AD4 wrote: +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 This patch avoids that the following warning is reported during hibernation: +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 Well, what exactly is the problem and why is the patch the right way +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 to address it? +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 It is not safe to call ktime+AF8-get() after having called timekeeping+AF8-suspend(). +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 /+ACo +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/dscontrol.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/dscontrol.c +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 index 0da96268deb5..9dbea4549484 100644 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/dscontrol.c +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +-+-+- b/drivers/acpi/acpica/dscontrol.c +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AEAAQA -84,8 +-84,8 +AEAAQA acpi+AF8-ds+AF8-exec+AF8-begin+AF8-control+AF8-op(struct acpi+AF8-walk+AF8-state +ACo-walk+AF8-state, +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 control+AF8-state-+AD4-control.package+AF8-end +AD0 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 walk+AF8-state-+AD4-parser+AF8-state.pkg+AF8-end+ADs +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 control+AF8-state-+AD4-control.opcode +AD0 op-+AD4-common.aml+AF8-opcode+ADs +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 - control+AF8-state-+AD4-control.loop+AF8-timeout +AD0 acpi+AF8-os+AF8-get+AF8-timer() +- +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 - (u64)(acpi+AF8-gbl+AF8-max+AF8-loop+AF8-iterations +ACo ACPI+AF8-100NSEC+AF8-PER+AF8-SEC)+ADs +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +- control+AF8-state-+AD4-control.loop+AF8-timeout +AD0 jiffies +- +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +- acpi+AF8-gbl+AF8-max+AF8-loop+AF8-iterations +ACo HZ+ADs +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 jiffies is Linux-specific and so it should not be used in the ACPICA code. +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 +AD4 Really? There is plenty of other ACPI code that uses the jiffies counter directly. +AD4 +AD4 Why wouldn't it be allowed to use the jiffies counter in this context since there +AD4 +AD4 is so much other ACPI code that uses that counter? +AD4 +AD4 acpica is different from acpi. It is the +ACI-core acpi code+ACI that is +AD4 shared across other operating systems. That is why jiffies does not +AD4 work in it :( Thanks Greg for the feedback. I wasn't aware of the difference between ACPICA and other ACPI code. Bart.
