On Friday, October 08, 2010, Sven Neumann wrote: > On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 23:23 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > I wonder what happens if you echo 0 to /sys/power/pm_async ? > > > > > > Nothing happens. The problem persists (tested with 2.6.36-rc7). What > > > would you expect to happen? > > > > Exactly that. :-) > > > > Commit 152e1d5920 should not affect the non-async case (I'd be surprised if > > it did really) and things should work with /sys/power/pm_async = 0 anyway. > > > > Please try check if you can reproduce with commt 152e1d5920 reverted and > > /sys/power/pm_async = 0. If you can, that's a driver bug. > > Ok, for the record, here's what I tried. I have rebooted between tests > to make sure there's no state pulled in from the previous test: > > 2.6.36-rc7, no changes, pm_async 1 : suspend fails > 2.6.36-rc7, no changes, pm_async 0 : suspend fails > > 2.6.36-rc7, 152e1d reverted, pm_async 1 : suspend works > 2.6.36-rc7, 152e1d reverted, pm_async 0 : suspend fails > > 2.6.34.7, no changes, pm_async 1 : suspend works > 2.6.34.7, no changes, pm_async 0 : suspend works > > I am not sure how this should be interpreted. There is a problem with the pxa2xx-mci.0 suspend that has been introduced some time after 2.6.34, but it is not related to commit 152e1d5920. The problem was not visible with pm_async=1 because of the very bug fixed by commit 152e1d5920. Please see if the problem is there in 2.6.35 (please test with pm_async=0). Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
