Hi Doug, TLDR: I'm no longer convinced this patch breaks suspend/resume more than it already is. Sorry about the noise. On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 at 23:25, Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 1:19 AM Emil Renner Berthing > <emil.renner.berthing@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi Douglas, > > > > Unfortunately this seems to beak resume on my rk3399-gru-kevin. I have > > a semi-complicated setup with my rootfs as a btrfs on dmcrypt on > > mmcblk0 which is the dw_mmc, so I'm guessing something goes wrong when > > waking up the dm_mmc which probably wasn't suspended before this > > patch. It's not 100% consistent though. Sometimes I see it resume the > > first time I try suspending, but then 2nd time I suspend it won't come > > back. > > Thanks for testing! Thanks for your detailed response. It made me want to make absolutely sure that this patch is the culprit. As a baseline I booted a vanilla 5.0.9 and suspend/resumed it about a dusin times without any errors. So I applied this patch and immediately it crashed on suspend, but in a way that I could still see the kernel log, and it was the mwifiex driver that crashed. I rebooted and tried supend/resume again and this time it seemed like it was the dwc3 or usb3-phy that crashed. I still have the kernel log if anyone is interested. However 3rd time booting 5.0.9 with this patch suspend/resume just works. At least the 2 dusin times I tried before giving up on making it crash. I went back to vanilla 5.0.9 and after a few tries I managed to make that one crash too. I guess that means this patch is off the hook. I'm sorry about the false report :/ /Emil
