Hello Bjorn, > -----Original Message----- > From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 3:04 AM > To: Barto > Cc: Liu, Chuansheng; Lu, Aaron; Tejun Heo; Rafael Wysocki; > linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Do not enable async suspend for JMicron chips > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Barto <mister.freeman@xxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > this patch solves these 2 bug reports : > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=84861 > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81551 > > Those bugs were already mentioned. But e6b7e41cdd8c claims to solve > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81551, and 84861 is a > duplicate of 81551, so it should also be fixed by e6b7e41cdd8c. > > So the question is, why was e6b7e41cdd8c insufficient? Presumably it > was tested and somebody thought it did fix the problem. The first patch e6b7e41cdd8c which is just exclude some of JMicron chips(363/361) out of async_suspend, then Barto found the same issue on JMicron 368, so we need one more general patch to let JMicron chips out of async_suspend, so we make this patch. Bjorn, tj, Could you kindly take this patch? As Barto said, it effected the user experience indeed, thanks. ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���"�)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
