Le 14.08.2006 23:37, Rafael J. Wysocki a écrit : > On Monday 14 August 2006 23:25, Laurent Riffard wrote: >> Le 14.08.2006 22:50, Rafael J. Wysocki a écrit : >>> On Monday 14 August 2006 22:03, Laurent Riffard wrote: >>>> Le 14.08.2006 21:16, Rafael J. Wysocki a écrit : >>>>> On Monday 14 August 2006 19:48, Laurent Riffard wrote: >>>>>> Le 14.08.2006 19:30, Rafael J. Wysocki a écrit : > ]--snip--[ >>>> Does it mean it was mistaken on swap device ? >>> Yes. If your resume device is not the first swap, it won't work without >>> the patch. >> Ok, that's why I had that strange behaviour: >> - 2 swap devices online, suspend to second one: suspend works. >> - on resume, it can't find suspend signature on the 2nd swap device, so >> it continue with normal boot, fsck all FS and say something like "swapon: >> 1st swap device busy". I had to mkswap it. >> >> I was thinking that my initrd script was broken or I was mistyping the resume >> device name in GRUB. Was funny... > > Sorry for that. > > This is not related to the BUG you've reported, but could you please try to > suspend using the second swap as your resume partition with a patched kernel, > just to make sure the patch works? I have no boxes with two swaps to verify > this ... It seems to always suspend to the first swap device, despite your patch. >>>> I did not pay attention on which swap device was online or not. >>> Please do when you test it. ;-) >> I tested with only 1 swap device online: /dev/mapper/vglinux1-lvswap: >> same BUG happened with 2.6.18-rc4-mm1 patched. > > Of course the patch doesn't matter if there's only one swap online. :-) > > I have no ideas for now and I think some debug patches will be needed to find > out what's up. > > Greetings, > Rafael
