On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 22:08 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > 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). Works fine with v2.6.35: 2.6.35, no changes, pm_async 1 : suspend works 2.6.35, no changes, pm_async 0 : suspend works So it looks like the problem has been introduced after 2.6.35 and was backported... Greetings, Sven -- 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
